US Satellites Dodging Chinese Missile Debris

GSGKT writes "Today's Washington Times runs a story about the increasing problem with space junk orbiting the earth. Debris from the anti-satellite missile test by the Chinese military last year threatens the integrity of more than 800 operating satellites, half of them belonging to the US. Two orbiting U.S. spacecraft were forced to change course to avoid being damaged soon after the incident. Air Force Brig. Gen. Ted Kresge, director of air, space and information operations at the Air Force Space Command in Colorado, estimates that "essentially (Chinese anti-satellite tests) increase the amount of space debris orbiting the Earth by about 20 percent", and the debris might threaten spacecraft for up to 100 years."

Well

[Icarus1919]

On the other hand, it looks like the missiles really do work.

Re:

[andyfrommk]

The link in the summary points to page two of the article, here is the whole article [washingtontimes.com]

Re:Well

[porkchop_d_clown]

made the space over China less habitable to spy satellites

You're not real familiar with how orbits work, are you?

Since that crap is in low orbit, I'm pretty sure it circles the entire planet every couple of hours.

Unless, of course, the Chinese have developed some sort of non-newtonian thruster system that lets their space trash hover in one place.

Re:

[rpj1288]

Once every 90-odd minutes, actually.

Re:

[AJWM]

but for the most part it just sits in one place above the earth

As long as that one place is somewhere on the equator, yes -- which China isn't.

Anyway geostationary orbit is about 22000 miles higher up than the orbits of the space trash and other satellites of interest.

Re:Well

[S.O.B.]

The satellite and resulting debris field [wikipedia.org] in question are in low Earth orbit [wikipedia.org] not geostationary orbit and therefore do not remain over the same location on Earth.

Re:Well

[CrazedWalrus]

If that wasn't the intended effect and was just a fortuitous (for them) side-effect, you can bet they've learned the lesson, and that it *will* be the intended effect next time.

"We didn't attack your satellites, we attacked our own (*cough*and used it to create a floating fragmentation grenade*cough*)"

Re:

[russotto]

Naa, just wait until the cloud is in the right part of the orbit and detonate a big nuke in the upper atmosphere. This temporarily expands a portion of the upper atmosphere, causing the orbits of the junk to degrade faster. Pick the place such that the fallout falls on the vacation homes for the top Chinese officials. Nuclear weapons... is there anything they can't do?

SanctionThem?

[Adambomb]

I find the tag of sanctionthem rather odd as how, realistically, would one impose these sanctions? Economic sanctions would be met with retaliatory tariffs; Do not forget that economically, North America needs them more than they need us (i'm not sure of the situation for the rest of the world).

What's left, political pressure? Because of how much China listens to political pressure concerning their own policies? Military pressure?

I do not see it.

That's a laugh!

[gbutler69]

North America does not *need* China in any sense of the word. That is a complete fallacy. We could cease all trade with China tomorrow and we would be perfectly fine. In fact, we'd probably be better off. Don't start in about all the "goods" we'd be missing. So what! We'd make 'em here. They'd be more expensive, but, that'd be a good thing. By the way, this WILL happen. As the oil reserves in the world dwindle, all nations will increasingly turn inward. Sorry to say it, but all the "international trade" and talk about "free trade" is economic voodoo! It's about to get UGLY! Real UGLY! Prepare for feudal times! By the way, this means the decline of human civilization and our inevitable extinction from this Galaxy. Free Trad, Schmree Trad. It won't matter one bit!

Re:That's a laugh!

[Adambomb]

What in the hell are you talking about? Theres more to prosperity than oil.

Remember who bought up all the steel reserves and is now slowly selling it back to the US? Have you ever been inside ANY manufacturing plant...at all..ever?

US industry would SHUT DOWN ENTIRELY if china pulled the plugs, or be cripplingly disadvantaged compared to the rest of the world if they decided to place punitive tarrifs. And if you think this is limited to crappy dvd players and laser pointers, do not forget that factory farms that are responsible for your daily food run off harvesters and harvester parts made primarily from components from china.

Do you have any idea how the world around you works at all?

Re:That's a laugh!

[peragrin]

Yes and no. Your right China could/would hurt us dramactically. but remember this. All that steel, copper, aluminum that we import is because American's couldn't produce those same materials for that price. pennsylvania is filled with steel even though all the steel forges have shut down.

I don't know if it was by accident or on purpose but we are using up china's steel. While keeping our own stockpiled natures way. Our companies can't compete on price, and closed down, but if price was no longer the issue then we have all sorts of resources available to us. Sure it would take a while to get going again. Lots' of little experience has been lost but If it came right down to it the USA is one of the few countries who could survive such an economic collapse.

Other than Oil and rubber the USA could be self sufficient. We have more than enough old tires floating around that rubber would last until we could get back up on our feet.

While It would hurt the long term repercussions wouldn't be any worse than the great depression. indeed another massive depression could very well be the spark that sets it off.

Re:

[Skim123]

I don't know if it was by accident or on purpose but we are using up china's steel.

I think it is mostly on purpose. Why use up your own non-renewable natural resources when you can let another country deplete it's stockpile first? In short, many first world nations use second and third world nations as their garbage cans and sources of non-renewable resources because they want to protect their own environment.

Re:

[Adambomb]

Thats a fine long term strategy, but consider the fact that you can't simply put that production capacity back online overnight. If china ever made a QUICK change, it wouldnt shut things down forever, but it would certainly have years of impact.

Re:

[M. Baranczak]

Other than Oil and rubber the USA could be self sufficient.

And coffee. One of the few crops that can't be grown in the US.

Re:

[AJWM]

And coffee. One of the few crops that can't be grown in the continental US.

There, fixed that for you. Coffee grows just fine in Hawaii and Puerto Rico.

Re:

[Adambomb]

okay then. By what reasoning?

You do have reasons to believe what you believe right?

Re:

[rhizome]

Read their only other (non-AC) comment. [slashdot.org]

Re:

[Adambomb]

Keeping in mind i've turned and welded chinese steel as well as pressed chinese seals and bearings for harvester rollers and sprockets. The only "Made in the USA" component WE made use of was our poly mix and the diphenylmethane diisocyanate terminating agent. We were adversely impacted by the steel issue alone i terms of bottom line, so if you think China has no influence over american industry then i'd REALLY like to know why.

Re:

[Adambomb]

Uh, and if china says no more steel those Ohio plants will be back up to full capacity immediately, with no lapse to retool or get workers back in there, and the shift in pricing would have no impact on american industry versus the rest of the world?

You do know theres a world out there right? Croikey, I sincerely hope you're just a troll and not really this short sighted.

Re:That's a laugh!

[QuickFox]

Given that we are the most violent society on the face of the planet,

The US the most violent? You gotta be kidding. Iraq has political/religious terrorist murders almost every day, that's far more violent than the US.

Of course that's Iraq under the US military, but still...

Looking elsewhere, Darfur is much more violent than the US. Colombia too. Etc.

However I'm pretty sure the US is the most violent in the modern Western developed world. It may perhaps also qualify, among all countries, as the country with the most aggressively violence-prone foreign policy.

Re:

[Adambomb]

Given that we are the most violent society

For all the fun of being canadian bashing america, I wouldn't say that one bit.

Might be a up there on the belligerence scale, but i'd put it neck and neck at best for whether china or the US has the most political arrogance.

Re:

[NoMaster]

If the US economy goes belly up a lot of that debt may very well become worthless paper, and at the same time China's primary purchaser of goods finds that it doesn't really have the money to purchase what it used to.

The thing is, the US will have to do everything it possibly can to prop its economy up - the real value of the US dollar is not in what it can buy & sell, but in the very fact that it's the de facto currency for buying & selling. Take that away, and the US dollar is at the mercy of its

Re:

[geekoid]

If we stopped trade with China tomorrow, are stock market would collapse. This would cause a huge ripple(read:Tsunami) through all industries in the US, and abroad.

Now as far as oil reserves dwindling.
We can do a global economy without using oil as fuel. The technology exists for electric/wind vehicles.
There won't be a global collapse.

Of course it matters. It matters to are descendants very much. Sure, we may be extinct in a million years(doubtful*) and the sun will grow cold in a few billion(certain) but t

Re:

[ScentCone]

If we stopped trade with China tomorrow, are stock market would collapse

Not to mention that Chinese factories are the only place where we can purchase large quantities of the word "our."

Re:

[QuickFox]

how, realistically, would one impose these sanctions? [...] What's left, political pressure?

What's needed is of course persuasion, give-and-take, meeting halfway, international treatises, etc. Of course the current US administration would never think of such solutions, always preferring the bullying approach.

"Spreading democracy" my ass.

I yearn for change. The US can be wonderful.

Re:

[c6gunner]

What's needed is of course persuasion, give-and-take, meeting halfway, international treatises, etc. Of course the current US administration would never think of such solutions, always preferring the bullying approach.

Yeah! Just look at how they're bullying North Korea! Poor Kim runs home crying every day.

The problem here isn't that the US is unwilling to negotiate. The problem is that you seem to be unable to understand that "persuasion", "give-and-take", and "meeting half-way" are not the solution

Re:

[NoMaster]

"Spreading democracy" my ass.

Yup. What the US practices is more like "Spread your ass" democracy.

Re:

[ColdWetDog]

I find the tag of sanctionthem rather odd as how, realistically, would one impose these sanctions?

Nuke'em from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Re:

[0xdeadbeef]

Do you realistically think our leadership doesn't have a contingency for open war with China, even just a trade war? The current administration notwithstanding, you're accusing our top military strategists, economists, financiers, and industrialists of outright incompetence. Somehow I doubt you're qualified to make that assessment.

We "need" China only in the way an illegal immigrant needs a DVD player from Wal-Mart.

Re:SanctionThem?

[Flavio]

I think the SanctionThem was meant to be sarcastic.

With the US economy decelerating and the loss of confidence in the US dollar, the US can't afford to stop trading with China. This move would essentially crash the global economy, and the US has the most to lose due to its massive foreign debt.

Most people don't realise just how rotten the American economic policy is. Back in 71, Nixon realised that the US could no longer finance the Vietnam war without printing money like mad. But the gold standard prevented the Fed from doing that, so he unilaterally cancelled the Bretton Woods system that made the US dollar convertible to gold. This was a total surprise, because he neglected to consult international bankers, and became known as the Nixon Shock. So from that moment on, the US effectively started printing gold. Of course this move didn't fool the bankers around the world, so the Fed had to raise interest rates to 21%/year to convince them to carry on using dollars. Over many years, the markets sort of returned to normal, despite the fact that the US debt had risen to unprecedented levels.

In 2006, the Fed was printing so much money that it stopped publishing the M3 money supply data in order to hide this fact. So now no one really knows how much money the Fed prints. We just estimate that the US foreign debt grows at the rate of $3 billion per day, mostly due to overseas military spending and interest on the already existing debt. This is despite the fact that the US is creating money out of thin air to partially cover this debt. A consequence is that the dollar has fallen in value about 15% in the last year against the Euro.

It bothers me a lot when the Fed governors propose what they call "financial incentive packages". These are usually composed of tax rebates and the central banks injecting money into the markets. Again, it's more money that was created out of thin air, and the tax rebates reduce the government's capacity to cover that money or to cover the debt. It's a temporary fix to the longstanding lack of financial discipline.

The general population typically doesn't care, and this includes Slashdot readers. They think that economics is awfully boring and complicated, and that the government is capable of taking care of policy. But the opposite is happening, and the US debt is getting out of control. This spending obviously makes politicians and contractors a lot of money, so they'll keep doing it until the economy crashes.

Re:

[inviolet]

With the US economy decelerating and the loss of confidence in the US dollar, the US can't afford to stop trading with China. This move would essentially crash the global economy, and the US has the most to lose due to its massive foreign debt.

That's backwards. The US has the least to lose, because a debt represents a good that we consumed but have not yet paid for. The first order of business in an economic collapse is to freeze or otherwise abate all foreign debts.

Either that, or we would just fail to

Re:

[meringuoid]

Either that, or we would just fail to make the payments. That would crash the value of all foreign debts, and so the holders would be lucky to get ten cents on the dollar by selling their paper to speculators (who are betting that we'll pull out of it).

This is true to a certain extent; with America owing such a huge amount, nobody's really keen to do anything that would force them to default. However... if America ever did default, that would have consequences that lasted far longer than the ensuing world

Re:SanctionThem?

[mochan_s]

That's backwards. The US has the least to lose, because a debt represents a good that we consumed but have not yet paid for. The first order of business in an economic collapse is to freeze or otherwise abate all foreign debts.

That would essentially mean that the end of all trading. So, the US would have to revert to a self-sustaining economy. US consumes the most resources in the planet per human being and that is not really feaseable.

Either that, or we would just fail to make the payments. That would crash the value of all foreign debts, and so the holders would be lucky to get ten cents on the dollar by selling their paper to speculators (who are betting that we'll pull out of it).

That would lead to imports crashing as well. Then, prices would go up and cause inflation. Then, everything will be worth less and less and foreign buyers will just buy up everything - companies, technology etc. Our stuff will also be sold on ten cents to the dollar out there.

This is why China dearly wants to avoid harming our economy. When somebody owes you an entire year of their salary, and is so far making payments on time, you don't knock them out of a job!

That is until the Chinese economy is the largest in the world which might be in 10-15 years.

Indeed, in the long run, US foreign debts guarantee that other countries align their interests with our own, and look out for our well-being as one would keep an eye on one's best milk cow.

It's only best milk cow as long as the milk flows.

I've seen so people many buy shit they can't afford, live in the moment, default on loans and then file bankruptcy which absolves them of all responsibility since somebody somewhere will bear the burden of it all. I think you're suggesting a similar approach to the economy. I am skeptical of this approach.

Re:

[BlueCoder]

To a reasonable certainty anything the size of a nut or bolt is tracked and we know where it came from.

Anything that is already in orbit before you get there is your responsibility to avoid.

So if your satellite blows up because someone "new junk" damages it then that countries/entities responsibly for the damage to the satellite and future damage from the consequential debris from it.

When it comes to collecting against governments there are tons of ways to collect if they have the money. The most likely be

Re:

[Adambomb]

How would you prove the bolt did the damage? That IS a really good point I hadn't considered, but how would one conclusively claim (as in would hold up internationally as conclusive) that the man-made debris did the damage not some random chunks of "native" space debris?

I could see the cost being greater to have the damage properly examined than the damage would be technically worth.

Re:

[whitehatlurker]

I find the tag of sanctionthem rather odd, especially when BombThemFromSpace would be the obvious choice. Where are the scifi fans when you need them?

Re:

[Adambomb]

I hear ya, its just that when the person also has a shotgun and a decidedly unpleasant expression it makes it a bit more of a judgement call =).

Well? What would you expect from Xeonphobes?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just their way of building the Great Spacewall of China.

Re:

[palegray.net]

They're afraid of Intel microprocessors [wikipedia.org]? Damn, that's odd...

Weapons

[ShieldW0lf]

Kind of makes US reliance on space based technological dominance in the theater of war into a bit of a joke, doesn't it. If some dumb nation were to weaponize space, this is how easily they and their efforts could be shut down. Kind of makes the whole idea seem really stupid.

Re:

[DrWho520]

Cluttering the space above your country to disable a space based military capability is the new "salting the earth?" If you do this as a countermeasure, you are also denying that space to any private venture as well. That includes private companies based in your adversary, your own country and every other country in the world. It is a decidedly short sited and unintelligent thing to do.

Re:

[Snowmit]

Well, according to this series of articles on Wired, you guys will win the space war [wired.com].

So, uh. All clear?

Re:

[deft]

This was posted above, but the parent apparently didnt see it, so I'm gunna paste it.

It basically points out that it would be pretty stupid to have everything reply on delicate electronics in space, and sorry, it's not that easy to beat the US military, no matter how unpopular its presidents actions may be.

"The US has no weapon systems that are GPS guided and never has, precisely because it is vulnerable. The Chinese may have just now gotten around to developing anti-satellite technology, but the Soviet Uni

Re:

[ShieldW0lf]

Are you unable to comprehend that this has nothing to do with anti-satellite attacks? All you need to do is ship up some junk and spread it around, and that's the end of it, indefinitely. Space access relies on everyone agreeing not to do this. If space access becomes a threat to any nation, space access can be removed from every nation.

Re:

[ShieldW0lf]

Are you unable to comprehend how large the immediate orbital region surrounding out planet is? Or for that matter, exactly how difficult it would be to target only specific satellites, instead of risking wiping out your own with some shotgun approach?

Exactly my point. Shotgun approach, easy, no more raining death from the sky, problem solved. You think people under threat of death care about the future of their communication satellites? It only takes one person to piss in the pool.

Re:

[palegray.net]

It only takes one person pissing in the pool with a small nuclear biological warfare device or in a major city, and that hasn't happened yet. It would arguably be much harder, and much more cost prohibitive, to launch a rocket capable of inserting significant debris into Earth orbit. Make a list of nations capable of launching rockets into space, then narrow it down to nations who might have an interest in destroying satellites on a wide scale, then narrow that down to nations who wouldn't mind losing their

Re:

[spun]

There's a big difference between launching a biological attack, which kills biological things, which the person doing the launching is; and spreading some debris around in orbit, which kills satellites. If a country uses satellites as a weapon, another country can easily wipe out all satellites. The consequences are less dire than being wiped out from space.

Actually it was good strategy

[NeverVotedBush]

They don't have so many satellites in orbit but could be worried about all the spy satellites the USA has. So they blast one of their junkers into lots of little ballistic missiles that damage all satellites.

It doesn't hurt them so much but it definitely harms other countries.

Give it time...

[Tastecicles]

...with all the debris already up there and the continual adding to it by the Chinese, we'll eventually find ourselves planet-locked with nowhere to go without having to run the gauntlet of bolt-sized particles travelling at 17000mph+. Someone's gonna have to go up there and sweep up while at the same time avoiding adding to the mess that's already there. Can you say Planetes [wikipedia.org]?

...so?

[Timothy Brownawell]

Send someone up with a really big vacuum cleaner.

Re:

[NeverVotedBush]

Yo, dude. It's already a vacuum.

But at least you spelled vacuum correctly...

Re:...so?

[Opportunist]

That's the joke, duh. Vacuum cleaner. Get it? Like, not a "vacuum cleaner", but someone cleaning the vacu...

Never mind, no joke gets better by explaining it.

Re:...so?

[maltwhiskman]

This is all about nothing.

40 years of spaceflight, and can't send crew...

[mikelieman]

It's very saddening that:

1) After all this time we can't send someone up there to clean this up.

2) We can't send the Navy to secure the space-lanes-of-commerce.

Re:

[mikelieman]

Yes, I do realize that RIGHT NOW we don't have, and can't recreate the lifting capacity we had way-back-when. That is essentially what I was lamenting.

The only thing to NASAs credit today is JPL and the robotic missions. Those don't totally suck.

However, I don't think we can do it 100 years from now, given that we've gone essentially nowhere for the past 40.

Bizarro am happy.

Re:...so?

[LordKronos]

You mean like Mega Maid?

Re:

[CrazedWalrus]

Only if she goes from Suck to Blow.

Re:

[innerweb]

I think President Scroob (sp?) might have something for you.

InnerWeb

Was NBC visionary, perhaps?

[MrM]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark_(TV_series) [wikipedia.org]

'nuff said...

MrM

Planetes

[lattyware]

Anyone seen the anime Planetes [anidb.net]? It's all about people working collecting debris in the future, because there is so much up there, that it is a risk to the (now common and commercial) space flights. Interesting that this is becoming a topic of interest as of late.

Where's the news?

[Opportunist]

USA threatened by Chinese junk.

Oh, that it's now also in space? That's the news here, I guess?

they're being smart

[Anonymous Coward]

China is just making sure that they are not able to be threatened by the US military complex without being able to stage a massive retaliation that would be unacceptable to the US.

After all the countries the US has invaded recently when they don't behave according to US wishes, any nation NOT preparing to defend themselves from the USA is being foolish. The US is seen as a bigger threat to world peace than any other nation right now, and it is only prudent to prepare to defend yourself.

Re:

[ErikZ]

How does causing a lot of space debris prevent any of that?

Considering what a huge trading partner China is with the US, any war between the two would be devastating for the economies. This keeps both countries on friendly terms.

Space Invaders

[WaZiX]

Easy, just equip the satellites with lasers [slashdot.org], and you just made yourself one heck of a space invaders game!!!

Re:

[Oktober Sunset]

more like asteroids, and the shooting just leads to more and more smaller bits.

Space denial?

[Vadim Makarov]

Wasn't space denial one of the design objectives for the Energia booster? It would deliver to LEO and dissipate several 100+ ton loads of steel balls, or so I heard, making it impossible for everyone to use ICBMs, not to mention launch longer-living vessels.

Re:

[deft]

There's plenty of nukes on subs that dont need to go into space. if the entire atmosphere was unusable... it wouldnt matter.

And who has the biggest sub fleet? Biggest bomber fleet? navy?

Hmm... dont think thats it.

Is it Possible for Safe Anti-Sat Testing?

[stoicfaux]

As more nations develop missile technology, they're going to want/need to test their anti-satellite capability. So is there any possible way to do it safely?

As yes, continued anti-satellite missile testing will happen, since any rational nation will have no desire to be under the thumb of someone else's satellites.

Twenty Percent

[DannyO152]

And who put the other 80 percent up there?

And US Junk?

[rueger]

"essentially (Chinese anti-satellite tests) increase the amount of space debris orbiting the Earth by about 20 percent"

So what you're saying is that the 70-80% of orbiting space junk that is American or Russian doesn't pose a hazard?

I call bullshit and scaremongering

Don't be a dork

[geekoid]

"So what you're saying is that the 70-80% of orbiting space junk that is American or Russian doesn't pose a hazard?"

No, the only person saying that is YOU. Classic strawman.

WHat they are saying it the total space junk INCREASED by 20%.

Crap, here comes the space junk

[Ignorant Aardvark]

I wrote about how idiotic this missile test was [cydeweys.com] back when it first happened, and it looks like I was dead on. It's scary how myopic China is being in polluting space for everyone for some military propaganda of dubious value. I wonder how far we are from a run-away Kessler Syndrome (when the amount of space junk in orbit is so bad that the junk keeps hitting other junk in an exponentially growing manner until space is so polluted with tiny pieces of junk that we cannot even get off the Earth).

Re:

[imsabbel]

Of course you ignore the fact that the us did anti-sat weapon tests before, and nobody complained.

NIce try

[geekoid]

The US shot down a satellite in 1985 that was at an altitude of about 555KM. The pieces decayed from orbit pretty quickly.

I would like to see a complete ban on anti-satellite technology that results in there being any debris.

The Chinese test was pretty irresponsible and they could have proven that they have the capabilities through other means. The US test was in direct response to the USSRs test. One of the last cold war cock waving events.

That said, after Bush's little speech; which certainly implied that

your sig

[CrazedWalrus]

New punctuation update "~" (no quotes) at the end of a line to indicate sarcasm.

Hey! That's a great idea!~

Great Weapon

[3DKnight]

This is probably the best "Denial" type weapon developed. In the case of the chinese, if there was ever a major threat to thier sovereignty they could make the whole orbit plane into a huge denial zone, crippling the more advanced nation that relies on that area, while giving themselves the advatage of using an army that hasn't learned to rely on satellites. the whole mentality of "if we can't have it, neither can you" works very well in warfare. Scorched earth... just taken to the next level.

The Futue Big Businesses

[BlueCoder]

Commercial exploitation of space is going to take off in the next twenty years. Once liability is firmly established the first commercial businesses will be the junk collectors/deflectors along with fuel/energy storage/production/transmission and repair services. All mostly robotic.

Reminds me of an anime...

[Talgrath]

...called Planetes in which the main characters are space junkers, people who's job is to either destroy or salvage pieces of junk floating around in space because there's so much of it now that it threatens satellites in orbit.

Re:Huh?

[NonSequor]

Half of the threatened satellites are American owned, not half of the debris.

Re:Huh?

[palegray.net]

Aw crap, somebody read the article :).

Re:

[Skuldo]

Someone had to :p

Re:

[palegray.net]

Because our junk isn't the result of intentionally detonating explosives in space with the aim of developing technologies designed to disrupt communications, which is kinda the point of the story.

Re:Huh?

[vtcodger]

Assuming that Reverend Moon's right wing slag sheet has something right for once, half the debris threatening satellites being American wouldn't be far off since almost all of the 80% that was there prior to the Chinese test was put there over the past 50 years by the US and USSR/Russia. But the Chinese test really does seem to have been irresponsible. Presumably they could just as easily have done their test at with a lower altitude target where the majority of the debris would have decayed and burned up in the atmosphere in a few hours, weeks or months.

Does point out a problem with space warfare though. With current technologies or anything resembling them, there's only going to be one battle and a short one at that. After a few dozen satellite destructions, there will likely be so much junk in orbit that near earth satellite lifetimes will be measured in weeks and manned spaceflight will be ill advised for decades or maybe centuries.

Re:maybe that's what the chinese wanted

[RockMFR]

RTFA.

According to the Joint Space Operations Center at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, the commercial communication satellite Orbcomm FM 36 maneuvered to avoid passing within about 123 feet of the debris field on April 6. A NASA Earth observation satellite Terra was moved June 22 to avoid coming within about 90 feet of the debris.

Re:

[ShieldW0lf]

Yes, it makes space less accessible, but when you're behind your "competitor" then they have more to lose than you do. Sadly this kind of logic has an attraction to the less responsible elements present in some governments.

This is a joke, right? You think people who are custodians of the safety of billions of people have a primary responsibility to preserve space access for the future? It would absolutely be a fulfillment of their responsibility in such circumstances.

Re:

[Jeremy Erwin]

I'm going out on a limb here, but I will assume this is code for 2 spy satellites.

And I'm going to go out a limb here, and assume you didn't read the article.

According to the Joint Space Operations Center at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, the commercial communication satellite Orbcomm FM 36 maneuvered to avoid passing within about 123 feet of the debris field on April 6. A NASA Earth observation satellite Terra was moved June 22 to avoid coming within about 90 feet of the debris.

Of course, you cou

Re:Right when the Chinese dump junk in space:

[Opportunist]

You've seen enough Ninja movies haven't you?

Let them come. According to the RIAA we got way more than enough pirates to handle them. Yarr!

Re:

[Arcanix]

How exactly is the US telling lies? The Chinese have openly stated that they did the test. Sure there is a lot of junk up there from the US and Soviets but we also didn't purposely blow up a satellite thereby in one second increasing the amount of debris by 20%.

Re:

[terrymr]

Not since the 80's anyway.

Re:

[thesupraman]

And when the US did their anti-satellite tests previously, it was different how? I refer you to October 13, 1985.

"In April 1988, the two Democratic chambers of Congress voted against extending the ASAT ban"

"The ban on using the MIRACL laser against space targets lapsed in 1996, when the new Republican Congress opted not to renew it."

"in August 2004 the U.S. Air Force published a doctrine on "Counterspace Operations" which affirmed its readiness to conduct "operations to deceive, disrupt, deny, degrade, or d

Re:

[RNLockwood]

The US "forgets" to compare or even mention the debris left from our anti-satellite test around 1985 when a satellite still being used by US scientists was destroyed. We lead the way and then castigate those who follow.

Re:Possible outcome.

[gmack]

Which would risk more debris in the atmosphere as the Chinese target every American spy satellite they find to erase the American technical advantage to one of pure numbers where the Chinese have the advantage.

The US military is completely dependant on their technology and the rest of the world knows it. Do their cruise missiles even work without GPS?

Any war by the US against a significantly developed nation runs the risk of rendering space completely useless for the next century. Think about the collateral damage from such a war taking out weather/TV/communications on top of the GPS which would almost certainly be targeted on purpose. The economic damage from that stupidity would be huge.

Letting the Americans know that was most likely a major reason behind the missile test in the first place and it's also why the Americans won't retaliate.

Re:

[Firethorn]

Do their cruise missiles even work without GPS?

Yes, they do.

Re:Possible outcome.

[j. andrew rogers]

"The US military is completely dependant on their technology and the rest of the world knows it. Do their cruise missiles even work without GPS?"

The US has no weapon systems that are GPS guided and never has, precisely because it is vulnerable. The Chinese may have just now gotten around to developing anti-satellite technology, but the Soviet Union had it ages ago.

The core guidance package of US weapon systems is extremely high precision inertial navigation (all systems described as "GPS-guided" are actually inertial -- the media is a bit stupid about these things, as GPS is an optional untrusted overlay on inertial navigation systems). Some intelligent terrain following weapons also use optical geo-referencing. As a matter of policy going back to the Soviet Union days, the US military machine views satellite systems as "nice to have" but its infrastructure is pervasively designed to operate under the presumption that there are no satellites in orbit. The vulnerability of the US military to massive system outages is greatly overstated; the Soviet Union was a much bigger threat on this scale than the Chinese are, and the US military has always been pretty religious about designing systems whose functionality was robust and in the face of rapidly degrading military infrastructure and relatively decentralized. It is easy to forget it, but the Chinese have nothing on the old Soviet Union in terms of technology and force numbers, and that was the doctrinal enemy of much of the modern US military.

Communications ...

[golodh]

Missile guidance systems may work fine without GPS, but as I understand, the military also makes heavy use of other types of satellites in Low Earth Orbit:

- communication satellites (all Command and Control over distances longer than say 20-80 Km; both voice and data).

- reconnaissance satellites (radar reconnaissance satellites, photo reconnaissance satellites, infra-red imaging satellites)

As far as I am aware, most of the emerging "networked" aspects of the military depend on satellite communications. The control of and imagery from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, and all those automated little messages that collect information from many sensors to where it's combined, analysed, interpreted, and redistributed as terms of a coherent picture of what's where, down to the target coordinates. I believe that we saw both in Kosovo and in the Iraq war how extremely powerful those systems are.

In other words: if someone can destroy those satellites, the US military will -at a stroke- loose its single largest unmatched advantage. So one might imagine that there is some reason for concern.

Re:Possible outcome.

[WED Fan]

but I've heard that...

Yeah, many great statements have always followed that opening.

Consider that GPS, when functional, is used to seed initial starting positions, but inertial nav packs are used to provide guidance. Other back up systems include other inertial nav packs, stationary fixes, and celestial navigation.

Consider that the GPS system can be knocked out. But, it's pretty damned hard to change the known locations of fixed locations, its damn near impossible to block good old centuries proved navigation by heavenly objects (unless the Chinese have an unknown deal with Klingons and Vogons) and with modern time keeping and the ability to shoot the stars with computer, it is surprising accurate.

Had you involved yourself at all with your country's military, beyond letting the press inform you, you'd have never made this mistake.

But, you can go on with your, "My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Ferris pass out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious."

Pullllease, "I heard that..."

Re:

[j. andrew rogers]

"*cough*JDAM*cough*Tomahawk*cough*F-16*cough*
Sorry got something stupid stuck in my throat. Anyways as I was saying the US has plenty of weapons sytems that use GPS systems and would either become completely ineffective or seriously crippled without it."

As was pointed out elsewhere, neither JDAMs nor Tomahawks (nor F16s for that matter) use GPS guidance -- only technically ignorant tools claim that any US weapon systems use GPS guidance. Even rudimentary research shows that systems like JDAMs and Tomahawk

Re:

[STrinity]

All the anti-sat weapons I've read about can only reach LEO, which makes them good against the majority of satellites up there, but not GPS, which are MEO, or comm sats, which are geosync.

Re:

[Guppy06]

"one of pure numbers where the Chinese have the advantage."

Can they swim? [navy.mil]

"Do their cruise missiles even work without GPS?"

Since they tend to predate the GPS constellation, I'd imagine so.

"Any war by the US against a significantly developed nation runs the risk of rendering space completely useless for the next century."

If satellites require constant readjustment to compensate for drag (atmospheric, gravitational, etc.) and eventually have to be replaced after a few years as they run out of maneuvering fuel