U.S. to attempt shoot-down of Spy Satellite

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by MikeTheC, Feb 16, 2008.

  1. MikeTheC Guest

    MikeTheC

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Location:
    Gallifrey -- Capitol City, Prydonian Sector
    #1
    [​IMG]

    On Friday, February 15, CNN.com posted an article on the story of how the U.S. Government intends to shoot up to three modified anti-missile missiles at US 193, the spy satellite previously announced through major news media outlets as having failed shortly after launch and now on a decaying orbit expected to end in an uncontrolled re-entry in early March, 2008.

    Also, on February 16, BreitBart.com posted an AP article which discusses Russia's reaction to the missile shot attempt, which decries the attempt as a way to threaten the world with the capability to shoot down satellites of other nations.

     
  2. Big-TDI-Guy macrumors 68030

    Big-TDI-Guy

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    #2
    Considering the payload size, and the fact these satellites are DESIGNED from day one, to be useless to enemy eyes should exactly this, happen.

    I see it as a way for the US to measure (#*$s with China.

    Just my opinion, though.
     
  3. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
  4. zioxide macrumors 603

    zioxide

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #5
    read it again. The article the OP posted is discussed on the second page of that linked topic :p
     
  5. Chromako macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Location:
    The Wired
    #6
    Wasn't it already knowledge that the US had the power to shoot down satellites? Besides, this doesn't prove much because the satellite is in a decaying orbit, that is, very low orbit. It's much harder to shoot something down that is in, say, geosynchronous orbit. That it is so hard for them to shoot this one down actually discredits some of the ideas that it would be easy for the US to down other units. And if anyone knows anything about hydrazine, it's really, really dangerous stuff. you do not want thousands of pounds landing on civilisation, or anywhere, really. If the fuel was spent, I'd be more sceptical, but this seems to be actually half legitimate.
     

Share This Page