Totally unacceptable, but what effective recourse or leverage is there that one is willing to implement?
Eye roll emoji indeed.
Aegis
Could be an immanent danger solution. Unlikely to deter future launches, but there is probably not a deterrent with the proper risk/benefit.
Rocket stages can be deorbited so any surviving parts land in the ocean, no? This is what I am talking about. A deorbit trajectory failure that results in parts landing on land is different than “meh, it probably won’t land on any important people”.
Even doing nothing (which appears to be the case for China), they have about 2/3 chance of hitting water.
If they had the skill to pick a trajectory, I expect they’d go for Taiwan 
I looked it up on the Heaves Above website (you can look for it as “CZ-5B R/B”) and on the 8th it is predicted to pass right over my house.
Rocket stages can be deorbited so any surviving parts land in the ocean, no? This is what I am talking about. A deorbit trajectory failure that results in parts landing on land is different than “meh, it probably won’t land on any important people”.
Even doing nothing (which appears to be the case for China), they have about 2/3 chance of hitting water.
If they had the skill to pick a trajectory, I expect they’d go for Taiwan
I looked it up on the Heaves Above website (you can look for it as “CZ-5B R/B”) and on the 8th it is predicted to pass right over my house.
it looks like between 8May and 10May I have a few shots at getting nailed by it! It comes pretty close to my house at least 3 of the passes between those dates
Totally unacceptable, but what effective recourse or leverage is there that one is willing to implement?
Eye roll emoji indeed.
Aegis
Could be an immanent danger solution. Unlikely to deter future launches, but there is probably not a deterrent with the proper risk/benefit.
No I meant shoot it down on its way to orbit. If they can’t responsibly launch F’em no orbit for you.
Oh, there’s that!
That wouldn’t work, AEGIS is a terminal interceptor, not a boost-phase interceptor.
https://spacenews.com/chinese-rocket-stage-predicted-to-reenter-atmosphere-around-may-8/
Second time in a year. Thankfully just another 10 to go Eyeroll emoji
Is anyone else concerned about what type of research will be conducted on the CSS? Do we really think they will be doing research to benefit all of mankind or will the research mainly be for improving their weapons and surveillance systems?
https://spacenews.com/chinese-rocket-stage-predicted-to-reenter-atmosphere-around-may-8/
Second time in a year. Thankfully just another 10 to go Eyeroll emoji
Is anyone else concerned about what type of research will be conducted on the CSS? Do we really think they will be doing research to benefit all of mankind or will the research mainly be for improving their weapons and surveillance systems?
There isn’t much a human can do in a tin can in orbit to further their knowledge of weapons and surveillance that can’t be better done on the ground.
https://spacenews.com/chinese-rocket-stage-predicted-to-reenter-atmosphere-around-may-8/
Second time in a year. Thankfully just another 10 to go Eyeroll emoji
Is anyone else concerned about what type of research will be conducted on the CSS? Do we really think they will be doing research to benefit all of mankind or will the research mainly be for improving their weapons and surveillance systems?
There isn’t much a human can do in a tin can in orbit to further their knowledge of weapons and surveillance that can’t be better done on the ground.
Yep. Would much rather have a non-crewed satellite that can work 24/7 for such activity.
That wouldn’t work, AEGIS is a terminal interceptor, not a boost-phase interceptor.
What’s the one that shoots down in the boost phase. I thought we stationed a ship off North Korea to send a message?
https://spacenews.com/chinese-rocket-stage-predicted-to-reenter-atmosphere-around-may-8/
Second time in a year. Thankfully just another 10 to go Eyeroll emoji
Is anyone else concerned about what type of research will be conducted on the CSS? Do we really think they will be doing research to benefit all of mankind or will the research mainly be for improving their weapons and surveillance systems?
If they can get and keep it in orbit then we can worry about it
We don’t have one.
There was a program way back that got cancelled… KEI.
The Airborne Laser was designed for boost phase, canceled.
I believe there is an IRAD program to use an AMRAAM derivative from a drone or F35…
That wouldn’t work, AEGIS is a terminal interceptor, not a boost-phase interceptor.
Well this is not a boost phase intercept, much closer to a mid course intercept rather than a terminal intercept.
But the SM-3 has taken down a satellite in a low orbit before, that NRO satellite. So I think it should be able to intercept this booster. If, big if here, if the aegis was in the exact spot. All anti ballistic missile systems in service are all about the relative velocity they are capable of performing a reliable intercept. Shorter range missiles have slower velocities, so more systems can reliably intercept. But it is not just the velocity of the missile, it is also the angle of the intercept that results in the relative velocity. So a SM-3 generally is designed for shorter range missiles that would be going slower, but has a wide envelope to engage. The faster the missile, the smaller the envelope they can intercept, so location of ship versus target is very narrow.
Part of it also depend on how accurate the targeting information will be, because once the booster gets low enough, the uncertainty of the location becomes much higher. Unlike the NRO satellite, that probably had much better targeting data than a missile intercept. So the ship knew exactly where to be and exactly when to fire the interceptor.
All that said, it would be dumb to shoot down the booster. Very unlikely it falls anywhere where people are and very unlikely we would know that in advance. The action would be provocative with no real benefit. Much better to let it land in some desolate region and scold China for bad space hygiene, rather than create a bunch of space debris ourselves.
That wouldn’t work, AEGIS is a terminal interceptor, not a boost-phase interceptor.
Well this is not a boost phase intercept, much closer to a mid course intercept rather than a terminal intercept.
But the SM-3 has taken down a satellite in a low orbit before, that NRO satellite. So I think it should be able to intercept this booster. If, big if here, if the aegis was in the exact spot. All anti ballistic missile systems in service are all about the relative velocity they are capable of performing a reliable intercept. Shorter range missiles have slower velocities, so more systems can reliably intercept. But it is not just the velocity of the missile, it is also the angle of the intercept that results in the relative velocity. So a SM-3 generally is designed for shorter range missiles that would be going slower, but has a wide envelope to engage. The faster the missile, the smaller the envelope they can intercept, so location of ship versus target is very narrow.
Part of it also depend on how accurate the targeting information will be, because once the booster gets low enough, the uncertainty of the location becomes much higher. Unlike the NRO satellite, that probably had much better targeting data than a missile intercept. So the ship knew exactly where to be and exactly when to fire the interceptor.
All that said, it would be dumb to shoot down the booster. Very unlikely it falls anywhere where people are and very unlikely we would know that in advance. The action would be provocative with no real benefit. Much better to let it land in some desolate region and scold China for bad space hygiene, rather than create a bunch of space debris ourselves.
The problem is if this is threatening populated areas, there are very few places you could emplace an AEGIS ship that would make shooting it down with an SM3 effective.
We could try to shoot it down preemptively without actually knowing if it will be a threat to land. But if we want to wait until we know for certain, it will be too late, and if it IS a threat, there isn’t much we can do to get an SM3 onto the target.
Most responsible spacefaring countries spend a little extra money on their boosters to include mechanisms that late them deorbit the later stages in a controlled fashion. China decided to cheap out and not include these mechanisms. Now we are in this situation.
Being they have lower standards, why no attempt to beat us to Mars?
Most responsible spacefaring countries spend a little extra money on their boosters to include mechanisms that late them deorbit the later stages in a controlled fashion. China decided to cheap out and not include these mechanisms. Now we are in this situation.
Being they have lower standards, why no attempt to beat us to Mars?
I seriously doubt they would be capable of keeping humans alive in a tin can for that long. Their lower standards also come hand in hand with lower engineering capability.
Totally unacceptable, but what effective recourse or leverage is there that one is willing to implement?
Eye roll emoji indeed.
Aegis
Could be an immanent danger solution. Unlikely to deter future launches, but there is probably not a deterrent with the proper risk/benefit.
No I meant shoot it down on its way to orbit. If they can’t responsibly launch F’em no orbit for you.
You post a ton of stupid shit BUT this takes the cake. The risks of falling debris from missiles could be catostrophic
https://spacenews.com/chinese-rocket-stage-predicted-to-reenter-atmosphere-around-may-8/
Second time in a year. Thankfully just another 10 to go Eyeroll emoji
Is anyone else concerned about what type of research will be conducted on the CSS? Do we really think they will be doing research to benefit all of mankind or will the research mainly be for improving their weapons and surveillance systems?
There isn’t much a human can do in a tin can in orbit to further their knowledge of weapons and surveillance that can’t be better done on the ground.
So why go to the effort and expense of putting the CSS in orbit? I just don’t see the benefit. Is it simply bragging rights? They can just just steal any meaningful developments that come out of the ISS if they were interested in scientific inquiry.
I seriously doubt they would be capable of keeping humans alive in a tin can for that long. Their lower standards also come hand in hand with lower engineering capability.
No one can, right now. The timeframe is 2040-2060 for the Chinese and Euros. U.S. has pencilled in ~2033, but a long way to go. I’d call it still “aspirational” at this point.
Given trajectories of scientific and engineering skill I wouldn’t bank on the Chinese forever lagging behind just because…they’re Chinese.
Probably the biggest differentiating factor would be the level of state sponsorship over the next 20 years.
And I’d kinda hope it ends up being largely a joint effort. Though I understand the motivational aspects of a good international competition.
https://spacenews.com/chinese-rocket-stage-predicted-to-reenter-atmosphere-around-may-8/
Second time in a year. Thankfully just another 10 to go Eyeroll emoji
Is anyone else concerned about what type of research will be conducted on the CSS? Do we really think they will be doing research to benefit all of mankind or will the research mainly be for improving their weapons and surveillance systems?
There isn’t much a human can do in a tin can in orbit to further their knowledge of weapons and surveillance that can’t be better done on the ground.
So why go to the effort and expense of putting the CSS in orbit? I just don’t see the benefit. Is it simply bragging rights? They can just just steal any meaningful developments that come out of the ISS if they were interested in scientific inquiry.
My guess is that they are trying to position themselves as a world power, and to do so they feel like they need to compete with our capabilities. I’m not saying their motives are innocent at all, but in this case I suspect it’s kinda like doing a moon landing. They are fighting us in a cold war and this CSS is their “moon landing”.