On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:16:38 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

This should be interesting.

The US has decided to shoot down a failed satellite that is expected to drop
out of orbit in early March.
There is concern that half of the 5,000 lb satellite may remain intact and
hit the earth in a yet unknown area.

The plan is to shoot it down before it enters the earth's atmosphere with a
missile fired from a US Navy ship.

Details at 11.

To what purpose? Unless they can blow it to pieces or change its
trajectory to their liking what will it accomplish except perhaps test
a "star wars" device.
Should be interesting watching this develop.

--Vic

JimH wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
news Don White wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
This should be interesting.

The US has decided to shoot down a failed satellite that is
expected to drop
out of orbit in early March.
There is concern that half of the 5,000 lb satellite may remain
intact and
hit the earth in a yet unknown area.

The plan is to shoot it down before it enters the earth's
atmosphere with a
missile fired from a US Navy ship.

Details at 11.
The article stated that they have a "modified" missile they are
going to launch from a naval ship in the Pacific. The questions I
have is what altitude will the missile intercept the satellite
and how long have we been working on this "modified" missile?

I can't see us coming up with a "modified" missile, launched from
a surface vessel, in just a couple of months that is capable of
intercepting an object in space.

I believe this is an opportunity to flex our muscles.
Ask the Chinese..they'll shoot down your garbage for you.
The Chinese are using our technology, which Bill Clinton illegally
gave them access to, Donny!

Yeah. That was bad. Almost as bad as the Reagan crew who sabotaged a
perfectly planned sting operation which would've stopped Pakistan
from illegally buying maraging steel for use in their nuclear weapon
program.

Crazy presidents. They're such wise guys, ya know?

Geo-politics don't you love it. Just think what would have happened
if in 1812 we just said the hell with it, Britain you can have us
back?

You have to do what is needed at the time to ensure your survival.
You can think 20 or 30 years in the future but what you do today may
mean you don't exist in 20 or 30 years.





This is based upon your many years of serving abroad with the Marine
Corps in dangerous situations, no doubt.
No Harry, I actually only served as a reservist and was never sent
overseas.

Big whoop.
Why did you cut out the rest of my response?

Do you have anything to say about your problem telling the truth?

Bertie, your military service is most impressive, and it says a lot about
the Marine Corps, picking up the fact that you were unfit for any sort of
serious duty.

That was totally uncalled and way off base. Go fock yourself Harry.



JimH,
It seems you find Harry's insults totally acceptable, until it touches
you. Nice value system you have.

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:16:38 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

This should be interesting.

The US has decided to shoot down a failed satellite that is expected to
drop
out of orbit in early March.
There is concern that half of the 5,000 lb satellite may remain intact and
hit the earth in a yet unknown area.



To what purpose? Unless they can blow it to pieces or change its
trajectory to their liking what will it accomplish except perhaps test
a "star wars" device.
Should be interesting watching this develop.

--Vic

The concern is that the tanks containing the rocket fuel "hydrazine" are the
components most likely to survive re-entry through the atmosphere.
Hydrazine poses a danger to people if inhaled. By blowing them up, the fuel
will be burned up during re-entry.

Of course, our all our resident NG cynics will now chime in with the "real"
reason.

Eisboch

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 02:37:13 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:16:38 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

This should be interesting.

The US has decided to shoot down a failed satellite that is expected to
drop
out of orbit in early March.
There is concern that half of the 5,000 lb satellite may remain intact and
hit the earth in a yet unknown area.

To what purpose? Unless they can blow it to pieces or change its
trajectory to their liking what will it accomplish except perhaps test
a "star wars" device.
Should be interesting watching this develop.

The concern is that the tanks containing the rocket fuel "hydrazine" are the
components most likely to survive re-entry through the atmosphere.
Hydrazine poses a danger to people if inhaled. By blowing them up, the fuel
will be burned up during re-entry.

Of course, our all our resident NG cynics will now chime in with the "real"
reason.

You mean there has to be another reason for blowing stuff up?

That show should be spectacular.

Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:16:38 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

This should be interesting.

The US has decided to shoot down a failed satellite that is expected to drop
out of orbit in early March.
There is concern that half of the 5,000 lb satellite may remain intact and
hit the earth in a yet unknown area.

The plan is to shoot it down before it enters the earth's atmosphere with a
missile fired from a US Navy ship.

Details at 11.

To what purpose? Unless they can blow it to pieces or change its
trajectory to their liking what will it accomplish except perhaps test
a "star wars" device.
Should be interesting watching this develop.

Ding, ding, ding! Give that man a prize.

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:48:04 -0500, BAR wrote:


The article stated that they have a "modified" missile they are going to
launch from a naval ship in the Pacific. The questions I have is what
altitude will the missile intercept the satellite and how long have we
been working on this "modified" missile?

I can't see us coming up with a "modified" missile, launched from a
surface vessel, in just a couple of months that is capable of
intercepting an object in space.

I believe this is an opportunity to flex our muscles.

Old technology. We've been able to bring down satellites since the
mid-80s.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:48:04 -0500, BAR wrote:


The article stated that they have a "modified" missile they are going to
launch from a naval ship in the Pacific. The questions I have is what
altitude will the missile intercept the satellite and how long have we
been working on this "modified" missile?

I can't see us coming up with a "modified" missile, launched from a
surface vessel, in just a couple of months that is capable of
intercepting an object in space.

I believe this is an opportunity to flex our muscles.

Old technology. We've been able to bring down satellites since the
mid-80s.


Are you sure about that?
How?

Eisboch

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:18:49 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:48:04 -0500, BAR wrote:


The article stated that they have a "modified" missile they are going to
launch from a naval ship in the Pacific. The questions I have is what
altitude will the missile intercept the satellite and how long have we
been working on this "modified" missile?

I can't see us coming up with a "modified" missile, launched from a
surface vessel, in just a couple of months that is capable of
intercepting an object in space.

I believe this is an opportunity to flex our muscles.

Old technology. We've been able to bring down satellites since the
mid-80s.

I'd be more impressed if they did it with a rail gun.

Whoo Hoo!!! :)

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 07:25:54 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:48:04 -0500, BAR wrote:


The article stated that they have a "modified" missile they are going to
launch from a naval ship in the Pacific. The questions I have is what
altitude will the missile intercept the satellite and how long have we
been working on this "modified" missile?

I can't see us coming up with a "modified" missile, launched from a
surface vessel, in just a couple of months that is capable of
intercepting an object in space.

I believe this is an opportunity to flex our muscles.

Old technology. We've been able to bring down satellites since the
mid-80s.

Are you sure about that?
How?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strateg...or_.28ERINT.29

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 07:25:54 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:48:04 -0500, BAR wrote:


The article stated that they have a "modified" missile they are going to
launch from a naval ship in the Pacific. The questions I have is what
altitude will the missile intercept the satellite and how long have we
been working on this "modified" missile?

I can't see us coming up with a "modified" missile, launched from a
surface vessel, in just a couple of months that is capable of
intercepting an object in space.

I believe this is an opportunity to flex our muscles.
Old technology. We've been able to bring down satellites since the
mid-80s.
Are you sure about that?
How?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strateg...or_.28ERINT.29

From a squid boat, in the middle of the ocean, using an existing tube
and missile dimensions?