China destroys satellite with missile

  • News
  • Thread starter Rach3
  • Start date
Rach3

Main Question or Discussion Point

Freedom!

Hurray! Our president is bringing us freedom!

Flexing Muscle, China Destroys Satellite in Test

China successfully carried out its first test of an antisatellite weapon last week, signaling its resolve to play a major role in military space activities and bringing expressions of concern from Washington and other capitals, the Bush administration said yesterday.

...Arms control experts called the test, in which the weapon destroyed an aging Chinese weather satellite, a troubling development that could foreshadow an antisatellite arms race. Alternatively, however, some experts speculated that it could precede a diplomatic effort by China to prod the Bush administration into negotiations on a weapons ban.

“This is the first real escalation in the weaponization of space that we’ve seen in 20 years,” said Jonathan McDowell, a Harvard astronomer who tracks rocket launchings and space activity. “It ends a long period of restraint.”

...Despite its protest, the Bush administration has long resisted a global treaty banning such tests because it says it needs freedom of action in space.

...In late August, President Bush authorized a new national space policy that ignored calls for a global prohibition on such tests. The policy said the United States would “preserve its rights, capabilities, and freedom of action in space” and “dissuade or deter others from either impeding those rights or developing capabilities intended to do so.” It declared the United States would “deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to U.S. national interests.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/19/world/asia/19china.html?hp&ex=1169182800&en=f9cca6749a53bb61&ei=5094&partner=homepage
 

Answers and Replies

Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
6,987
14
What do you want to do? Run about the streets screaming "hypocrisy"?

I'd be very surprised to hear that the US doesn't possess this capability. From what I've read or heard before, low orbit reconsats are easy prey to a slightly modified F-15 or F-22.
 
Last edited:
Rach3
What do you want to do? Run about the streets screaming "hypocrisy"?

I'd be very surprised to hear that the US doesn't possess this capability.
USA has had the capability since the '80's, as you'd know if you'd read a mere five lines into the quoted article. It's implementing the capability that counts.
 
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,843
17
I'm with Gokul43201 -- you don't appear to have made any point at all.
 
Rach3
No point? China is developing anti-satellite weapons, and the neocons will follow in kind, because it is their American "freedom" to spend hundreds of billions on a new arms race whether anyone likes it or not. What's not to be concerned about?
 
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,843
17
No point? China is developing anti-satellite weapons, and the neocons will follow in kind, because it is their American "freedom" to spend hundreds of billions on a new arms race whether anyone likes it or not. What's not to be concerned about?
None of this, of course, appeared in the opening post. :tongue:

Hrm, you have literally quoted a statement of fact in the OP, and then you misquoted it here. Okay, so what? Facts are just facts (and misquotes are just dumb); they do not constitute a point.
 
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,843
17
Hurray! Our president is bringing us freedom!
Oh, my mistake, I missed this. I guess you were making a point after all. I'm glad you're happy, but I think you misunderstood the article; it doesn't say he's bring us freedom. It says that the government intend to preserve what freedom we already have.
 
Rach3
No, Bush doesn't say he's preserving our freedom, he says he's excercing his freedom, specifically "freedom of action", which is his personal euphemism for "freedom to fulfill whatever multibilliondollar harebrained scheme I think up."
 
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
14,843
17
No, Bush doesn't say he's preserving our freedom, he says he's excercing his freedom, specifically "freedom of action"
You're reading the same article I am, right?

the United States would “preserve its rights, capabilities, and freedom of action in space”

the United States would “deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to U.S. national interests.”​

which is his personal euphemism for "freedom to fulfill whatever multibilliondollar harebrained scheme I think up."
I don't see this in the article either.


I doubt that you opened this thread as an exercise in reading comprehension, so I'll ask again: what is your point?
 
2,903
13
Rach, all you ever do is hype things up. Get a life.
 
verty
Homework Helper
2,157
198
He wants to preserve the freedom to deny freedom.
 
38
165
WASHINGTON — The Chinese military used a ground-based missile to hit and destroy one of its aging satellites orbiting more than 500 miles in space last week, demonstrating China's ability to target regions of space that are home to U.S. spy satellites and missile-defense systems.

The test of anti-satellite technology is believed to be the first of its kind in 20 years by any nation, and it raised concerns about the vulnerability of U.S. satellites and a possible weapons race in space.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003531646_chinasat190.html [Broken]

We have spent $ billions trying to hit an incoming nuclear weapon, you know, the old hit a bullet with a bullet quasi technology. Now China spends a fraction of that amount and shows that they can knock out our surveillance satellites as well as our GPS system. Most of our advanced weapons use GPS for targeting.

This is interesting, the Chinese can now stop us from starting a war unless we do it strictly low tech. We can however clean up the mess with Chinese made Hoover vacuum cleaners.:rolleyes: Some car owners might even have to learn how to read a road map again.

It really irks me that I can not come up with a significant list of useful products that are not made in China. We do still make Crayons and playdough, but so does China.

Perhaps American corporations have given the Chinese a bit too much of our technology. In years to come I doubt that we will see that there was any benefit in giving China our jobs and our factories so that we could maintain a faux appearance of prosperity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
verty
Homework Helper
2,157
198
Why does it worry you that China produces so much? If it didn't, I suspect you would need to pay more for it.
 
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
6,987
14
Last edited by a moderator:
BobG
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
110
80
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003531646_chinasat190.html [Broken]

We have spent $ billions trying to hit an incoming nuclear weapon, you know, the old hit a bullet with a bullet quasi technology. Now China spends a fraction of that amount and shows that they can knock out our surveillance satellites as well as our GPS system. Most of our advanced weapons use GPS for targeting.
Not quite. They can hit our low orbiting satellites provided we maneuver them to make them easier to hit. They can't hit a GPS because GPS satellites have too high of an orbit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
38
165
Not quite. They can hit our low orbiting satellites provided we maneuver them to make them easier to hit. They can't hit a GPS because GPS satellites have too high of an orbit.
Bob
What would make you think that they can't go higher? If not now, at the rate they are absorbing our technology, they will in the near future.
 
38
165
Why does it worry you that China produces so much? If it didn't, I suspect you would need to pay more for it.
That is also what the Romans suspected. China has our industrial base in a strangle hold and everyone looks the other way because we can buy a cheap microwave oven. And it is not just that, China is using our technology for military advancement. Plus they are producing more engineers than we are.
 
Last edited:
38
165
The Chinese may be planning to put GPS satellites in orbit, and use a dirty trick they learned from the French. Apparently they’re going to make the network’s signal frequency so close to the American GPS system’s that one can’t be jammed without jamming the other.

Another dirty trick: The Chinese were allowed to participate in the development of Europe’s Galileo GPS system based on the belief that the technology could only be used for civilian purposes, but China used their involvement to develop their military system.

When will the West learn that China’s rapid tech rise is based almost entirely upon theft?
http://www.havelaptopwilltravel.com/future-chinese-gps-system-cant-be-jammed/

Now we add this:

China's decision to expand the functionality of its satellite navigation network could undermine the economics of Europe's nascent Galileo system, according to sources close to the project.

Until now, experts believed that China's "Beidou" navigation system – a 35-satellite constellation – would only be used by its armed forces. This explained China's decision to invest €200 million in Europe's €2.5 billion Galileo programme.

But things appear to have changed in Beijing. On 2 November, the country's official news agency Xinhua reported that Beidou would, from 2008, begin providing an "open" level of service, with 10-metre accuracy, in addition to its "authorised", encrypted military service.

Precisely how open this 10-metre service will be, remains unclear, but the Xinhua report implied that it would be available free to all Chinese citizens and to other countries whose governments strike a deal to use the signal in satellite navigation devices.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10472-chinas-satellite-navigation-plans-threaten-galileo.html

They use the technology of the west to build systems and products that compete with our own. They produce it cheaper, we buy from them. It has gone on that way for far too long.
 
Last edited:
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
6,987
14
Bob
What would make you think that they can't go higher? If not now, at the rate they are absorbing our technology, they will in the near future.
You don't think it is a more than significant technological leap to go from shooting down weather satellites orbiting directly overhead at an altitude of 500 miles to taking out GPS satellites orbitting somewhere at an altitude of over 10,000 miles? Do you anticipate the US technology to remain stagnant during the time it would take to make this transition?
 
BobG
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
110
80
http://www.havelaptopwilltravel.com/future-chinese-gps-system-cant-be-jammed/

Now we add this:


http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10472-chinas-satellite-navigation-plans-threaten-galileo.html

They use the technology of the west to build systems and products that compete with our own. They produce it cheaper, we buy from them. It has gone on that way for far too long.
How are either the Chinese (or the Europeans) going to make money on navigation satellites when the US makes navigation data available for free?

In fact, pressure from foreign competitors is what motivated the US to remove the 'selective availability' from the data they did provide. It would reduce the chance of other countries going through the expense of developing their own satellite constellation, meaning the US could still reinstate selective availability in an emergency (and it would have to be a huge emergency).

The remote chance of having navigation data taken away might provide some room for someone to provide guaranteed navigation data for a fee, but it seems to me that relying on a Chinese nav constellation built for the military would have the same risk as relying on a US nav constellation built for the military. Either one could be taken away.
 
BobG
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
110
80
Bob
What would make you think that they can't go higher? If not now, at the rate they are absorbing our technology, they will in the near future.
I'm sure they can go higher.

The problem with hitting high altitude satellites is that it's hard to launch directly into a high altitude orbit. The typical method is to launch into a low orbiting parking orbit and then boosting the satellite into the target orbit (via a Hohman Transfer, for example).

The problem is further complicated by needing to launch your ASAT into an orbit that matches the target satellite. That means a major satellite maneuver after launch or waiting the until the orbital plane of the target satellite happens to be directly over the launch site. Ground launched ASATs leave a lot to be desired. For high altitude satellites, you have to boost your satellite anyway, so you might as well combine the orbit plane change with your orbit boost, but that still puts some strict constraints on when you boost your satellite. You have to time your maneuvers so you wind up in the same orbit plane and wind up intersecting the target satellite and, unless you're going to leave a whole lot to faith, you have to be able to see your own ASAT to control it.

Rather than developing or absorbing technology, the only way to streamline the process is to discover or absorb some new laws of physics.

If a foreign country can detect your satellite launches and has a more effective method of destroying low orbiting satellites than you, then your ASAT might never live long enough to reach the higher orbit. You have to make sure your enemy doesn't know the satellite you just launched is an ASAT until it's too late to do anything about it.

Which gets back to the original post. A treaty banning ASATs isn't worth much unless you can verify the other country doesn't have ASATs. About the only reliable verification is to allow the other country to inspect every satellite prior to launch and that's not going to happen. Without verification, any treaty is really just saying 'Let's trust each other'. If you really trust the other country, you could do that without a treaty.
 
38
165
How are either the Chinese (or the Europeans) going to make money on navigation satellites when the US makes navigation data available for free?

In fact, pressure from foreign competitors is what motivated the US to remove the 'selective availability' from the data they did provide. It would reduce the chance of other countries going through the expense of developing their own satellite constellation, meaning the US could still reinstate selective availability in an emergency (and it would have to be a huge emergency).

The remote chance of having navigation data taken away might provide some room for someone to provide guaranteed navigation data for a fee, but it seems to me that relying on a Chinese nav constellation built for the military would have the same risk as relying on a US nav constellation built for the military. Either one could be taken away.
The free data is irrelevant ,I am talking about the Chinese marketing the hardware for GPS. ie hand held and automotive. As a matter of fact they already are. edit: And when their systems start selling for a fraction the cost of ours they will have taken over yet another US industry.

http://www.made-in-china.com/productdirectory.do?subaction=hunt&mode=and&style=b&code=0&word=GPS&comProvince=nolimit&x=26&y=15
 
Last edited:
russ_watters
Mentor
19,028
5,187
The free data is irrelevant ,I am talking about the Chinese marketing the hardware for GPS. ie hand held and automotive. As a matter of fact they already are. edit: And when their systems start selling for a fraction the cost of ours they will have taken over yet another US industry.

http://www.made-in-china.com/productdirectory.do?subaction=hunt&mode=and&style=b&code=0&word=GPS&comProvince=nolimit&x=26&y=15
So what does that have to do with China setting up a GPS-like satellite navigation system? :confused: That article makes no sense and the idea of China (or Europe) spending billions to create a product to sell against a competitor who provides a better one for free doesn't make a whole lot of sense either.
 
Last edited:
38
165
So what does that have to do with China setting up a GPS-like satellite navigation system? :confused: That article makes no sense and the idea of China (or Europe) spending billions to create a product to sell against a competitor who provides a better one for free doesn't make a whole lot of sense either.

Once again since you apparently missed it, I was primarily talking about the hand held and automotive units. That is where the money is in GPS. The process of setting up their own systems is currently underway in both Europe and China. The Chinese hold an interest in the European system that gives them access to their data.

The Chinese are already making cheaper GPS devices that use our satellite free data feed. Yet they are adding another layer of control by deploying their own satellites. Essentially in a few years they will have taken over yet another US industry. If that is OK with you that is just fine and dandy.:rolleyes:

From a military point of view, if the Chinese system uses a radio frequency close enough to ours, we will not be able to jam theirs without jamming our own, and possibly the Galileo system too. As I look again at the situation it seems that there would be no need for them to want to destroy our GPS satellites., which relates back to the OP.
 
Last edited:

Related Threads for: China destroys satellite with missile

  • Last Post
2
Replies
48
Views
7K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
3
Replies
68
Views
6K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
22
Views
4K
Top