Friday, February 29, 2008

To Kill a Crashing Bird

I was supposed to write some travel entry--significant since it had been 18 years since I last went to that place--but the photos aren't available yet.

-oOo-


With the nation's penchant of getting preoccupied solely on the current political circus, Filipinos might be blissfully unaware that the United States and China had started war in outer space. Of course I'm exaggerating. Or am I? Allow this writer, whose education in world politics consisted mostly of reading Tom Clancy, to comment on a recent development just above the earth's atmosphere.

More than a year ago, on December 14, 2006, a US satellite, supposedly a spy satellite (a "bird" in Clancy slang), lost communications shortly after entering orbit. It was calculated to crash back to Earth in a little more than a year.

Weeks later, on January 11, 2007, China successfully tested its anti-satellite (ASAT) capabilities when it shattered its own defunct weather satellite with a ground-based ballistic missile in a kinetic strike (meaning, no explosives were used, the high-speed impact itself provided the destructive energy). The secrecy of the test and the resulting orbiting debris field that until now is a concern for space mission planners provided fodder for a US-led international criticism.

One year later, the spy satellite, known as USA-193 or NROL-21, was almost due for its fiery plunge to the ground. Around this time, the United States floated around its plan to shoot down the bird, citing the chance that the hydrazine fuel tank of the bus-sized object may survive re-entry and pose a hazard to people over an area of two football fields. While hundreds of satellites have made planned or unplanned deorbits, they all have almost empty fuel tanks. In this particular case, since the bird had no contact with controllers so early in its mission, the hydrazine was never used up in orbital maneuvers--the fuel tank was still full.

The plan was to modify the software of the ship-based AEGIS missile defense system to better recognize and track the falling satellite. The range of AEGIS could reach the edge of space, but the bird was moving faster than the ballistic missiles AEGIS was originally designed for, so tracking the falling object might be problematic. A modified SM-3 missile, the type recently used in missile defense tests, would be launched from a ship to destroy the satellite via a kinetic strike. A successful hit should destroy the fuel tank, and the satellite fragments should be too small to survive re-entry or pose significant damage. Striking at low altitude would ensure that most of the debris would fall to back to earth within weeks, compared to the Chinese high-altitude ASAT test. Three cruisers would be positioned in the Northern Pacific to provide three chances of interception.

On February 21, 2007, amidst an ongoing lunar eclipse and earlier concerns on bad weather, the shootdown pushed through with spectacular results at the first attempt and with a video to boot that showed a brilliant explosion indicating possible destruction of the tank and dissipation of the hydrazine fuel. The US government had been harping about its transparency regarding the shootdown, wherein the public had been informed before, during and after the event. In an apparent diplomatic one-upmanship, they were willing to share with China information on the strike.

Critics, however, doubted the reasons behind the shootdown. The probability that the satellite would crash on a populated area was very low (only 3 percent, if I wasn't mistaken). Cynics wonder why the United States suddenly became concerned about the potential human tragedy. Perhaps there was classified information or technology that the US would not want to be in the hands of other countries. Others pointed out the $60 million price tag. Surely it could be cheaper, although more complex, to just evacuate an entire city if things ever came to that. The shootdown could also legitimize the Chinese ASAT test and spark an arms race in outer space (as if there is currently none).

Technically speaking, the shootdown isn't good enough to be bragged around as an ASAT capability. The bird was destroyed at an altitude of only 247 km. No satellite could sustain an orbit that low because it would encounter significant atmospheric drag. The Chinese ASAT test, on the other hand, was aimed at a satellite 865 km high up there. What the activity demonstrated though is the capability of AEGIS to accomplish objectives beyond its original air and missile defense purpose. With a successful hit at first attempt, AEGIS surely works as advertised and even more! Russia indeed has valid worries that the Americans were actually flexing its missile defense muscles. No doubt valuable data for a variety of, at the very least, military purposes had been gleamed from this activity. I would also think that planning may have started a year ago, when the bird was determined to crash with a full load of hydrazine, but if the government was to be believed that planning began only in January, then the speed in implementing modifications on existing systems when the need arises could prove to be a crucial tactical factor.

What's with the suggestion of using the space shuttle to scoop out the bird? At such a low altitude, the shuttle would be in danger of encountering drag and falling back to earth earlier than scheduled. The shuttle Atlantis was actually on a mission to the International Space Station during those times, and only when it had landed back at Florida did the shootdown commence.

As for a new Cold War where outer space is the new battlefield, I've been hearing of analysis that the Chinese have noticed US dependence on satellites in warfare: reconnaisance, communication and navigation. And if Reagan's plan pushes through, the future might see orbiting defensive and offensive platforms. It does follow that China would endeavor to counter this American capability via ASAT weapons. With no direct casualties, destroying satellites seems to be a politically correct tactic in future wars. The US is also trying to be one step ahead with their research on satellite protection and even self-repairing satellites.

I think, though, that China would rather compete in economic terms, as it had done so throughout history. If I may wager, it would be a United States, in some form of desperation, which would initiate a military attack against China. This is where the Chinese ASAT capability comes in: destruction of the navigation then communication then reconnaisance satellites may stop a conventional attack. To continue the offense or to push things further with unconventional means would prove to be messy, and hopefully the Americans would come to their senses before that happens.

Maybe I've been reading too many Clancy novels, watching too many action movies or playing too many computer games to have thought of these things. After all, these are just speculations and shouldn't be taken seriously at present. If there's any mention of the jostling among the superpowers in local politics, it is again connected to the NBN scam, wherein the President is being accused of giving the Chinese territorial and economic concessions, among others, in exchange for paltry loans and projects. If the public has been numb to appeal on morals, then an appeal to nationalism might do the trick.

If it were not for a news article buried in Philstar, I wouldn't be aware of this shootdown. There was no mention of this event in the Philippine blogs I frequent save for one. Both actually connected it to an earlier fallen spacecraft, Skylab. This space station flew and fell in the '70s, the decade before I was born. Back then, the Philippines had been included among its probable crash locations, causing a stir among the population. Its remnants eventually crashed somewhere in Australia, but the stir in the Philippines must be considerable enough that people here do remember it.

(Photos from Wikipedia, which in turn must have sourced it from the US government)

Labels:

3 honked their horn

Blogger GingGoy said...

they had to shoot down the satellite since it contained toxic chemicals.

haven't heard about that skylab falling into pinas

Sunday, 02 March, 2008  
Blogger Sidney said...

I wonder why we can't live peacefully together... it is a small world after all.
It is a bit depressing...

Anyway, a very interesting post.

Wednesday, 05 March, 2008  
Blogger -= dave =- said...

tito b: i don't know more about skylab crash. i wasn't born that time yet, haha.

sidney: indeed it's a small world considering the vastness of space.

Wednesday, 05 March, 2008  

Post a Comment

<< Home