China tests ASAT

UFOArriving said:

Sadly, that might not be the case here, it is always cheaper to buy a bullet than get a shield, the space arms race could eventually end up with both side full of "bullets" and no "shield" like the nuke standoff currently - maybe the only way for mankind to united as one is when we saw the UFO coming

Click to expand...

Well in a nuclear standoff situation having the capability to destroy your enemy, in other words having "the bullet" is also having "the sheild". Offensive nuclear weapons are also defensive weapons because of MAD. However, in space, you have capability that you need to protect. Since satillites (communication, reconnisance, GPS, etc.) indirectly influence the battle on Earth they need to be protected to have any value once your enemy has ASAT weapons. What good does having lots of ASAT capability do you if you lose your own satillite network (well its obvious that you deny the enemy the use of space, I'm not dumb) especially if you are a nation like the US that is heavily dependent on satillites. That is why ASAT weapons will inevitably be followed by anti-ASAT weapons. AASAT weapons, if you will. Because just having the ability to destroy in a space conflict is useless; you need to be able to protect your assets as well.

Cool, that makes a lot of sense. I have checked out several military forums yesterday and this one has come to me by far as the most clean and professional forum to have a meaningful discussion. That's why I decided to participate here and only here Thanks for the good work!

Click to expand...

Nice to have good feedback once in a while... Good to know that our work is appriciated.

There are gps or radar beacons on the mock missiles. But the temporary concern right now is software glitches for the system.

Les Adieux said:

"More thorough analysis no longer suggests that the target satellite might have maneuvered before the attack in order to line up with the interceptor," he said in an e-mail. "All indications now are that the missile was launched toward the north and closed in from ahead and slightly to the side of the target's path."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I bet you've read this update from James Oberg.

a few facts about the test: the satellite was launched in 1999 from Taiyuan space center, the killer vehicle was launched from Xichang space center. the easy way to line up two objects is to launch them from the same place. by design the satellite can only last two years, i.e. it has been out of service since 2001.

Click to expand...

this means that China has a legitimate satellite attaking ability.

Les Adieux said:

"More thorough analysis no longer suggests that the target satellite might have maneuvered before the attack in order to line up with the interceptor," he said in an e-mail. "All indications now are that the missile was launched toward the north and closed in from ahead and slightly to the side of the target's path."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I bet you've read this update from James Oberg.

a few facts about the test: the satellite was launched in 1999 from Taiyuan space center, the killer vehicle was launched from Xichang space center. the easy way to line up two objects is to launch them from the same place. by design the satellite can only last two years, i.e. it has been out of service since 2001.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the update. Looks like Oberg was premature to conclude there was re-allignments before the kill & some, or maybe just one, on this forum was too eager to jump on that conclusion as well.
Coupled with the height of the kill, this is beginning to look more like an advancement not only for the PLA, but perhaps compared to what USSR & US did in the 80s as well.
I guess this explains the ferocity of US's response thus far compared to say the response to the alleged attempted 'attack' on US sats with laser last yr.

Aviation Week just published the detail of the Chinese test - very interesting.



The attack is a head-on, so it's a demo of NMD capability rather than just attacking a sat. A sat travelling at that high orbit goes much faster than a warhead, both don't have propelling power. But warhead may be smaller.

Quote from the article:

The attack occurred at 5:26 p.m. EST Jan. 11 as the target satellite was 715 mi. from the Xichang launch site in Sichuan province. It was passing about 45 deg. above the horizon at Xichang, as the Chinese ballistic missile with the kill vehicle was launched either directly from Xichang or a site nearby.

Tracking of the target satellite was managed from a large team at the Xian Chinese space tracking control center.

The azimuth from the launch point to the target was about 346 deg., or 15 deg. west of due north. The target in orbit was heading south, so the intercept involved an extremely high-velocity, nearly head-on collision, sources said. Debris from the impact was ejected in all directions at 700-1,400 mph., tracking data indicate.

The event occurred 94 min. before sunrise at Xichang, but the target satellite was in sunlight, enabling excellent monitoring of the event by the Chinese.

Tracking cameras at Xichang had an excellent view of the intercept from the front, while cameras at China's other major launch site at Jiuquan in the Gobi Desert had an equally good viewing angle from behind.

.........

Air Force Space Command data show that when the kill vehicle impacted the target satellite, debris was ejected from the impact point at velocities of up to 1,400 mph. (2,000 fps.).

So using physics, the sphere area is 4*pi*r2.

If the positioning is provided by the ground, a 850km distance with RCS=3m2 is equal to the 300km with RCS=0.4m2, as for the precision capability.

This will scare the hell out of many people.

Not sure if everyone can see this or not, but here is an very interesting graphic view about the ASAT target compare to all other satellites currently in the orbit:

I love this MSNBC article. Shows you typical Russian attitudes, and why its about time you just have to chide about them..



" but China's foreign ministry said it had no information about the test "

Why ask them? They didn't think the J-10 existed and equipping their air force until now.

"Russia's defense minister said he doubted it even took place as reported."

Wow. Talk about a head being buried in the sand.

If a defense minister has no idea of the US tracking abilities in space, I guess its time to find another to fill his job.

This is the clincher.

"The RIA Novosti news agency quoted retired Col. Gen. Leonid Ivashov, the former head of the Russian defense ministry's international military cooperation department, as saying that the missile used by the Chinese was modeled on the Soviet IS-1 missile designed to destroy satellites, developed in the 1970s."

Wow, everything the Chinese done the Russians must always try to get credit for and claim its kind of a copy of whatever the Russians made.

Except that---

"However, NBC News space analyst James Oberg said that was a doubtful claim. "The IS vehicle was an orbit-to-orbit 'killer satellite' that attacked with a shrapnel blast only after approaching the target," he explained. "The Chinese approach was a direct ascent that destroyed by the kinetic energy of the vehicle itself."

This is my second post.

I know this forum is not suppost to be political so I will try to sound objective.

I am not a military expert but I think from the point of view of the military this is a good move for PLA. In the event where the mainland attempts to physically return Taiwan to China: All Taiwanese aided satellites over China should be destroyed. Fight the war to win.

I have no experience in military or policing, but I think that destroying satellites that are over China is logical, because I am honestly going to use movies to prove my point. (From SWAT movies) Just like in SWAT entries into buildings to capture individuals, they may sometimes cut power to try to gain psychological advanatage and control the environment of the individuals to be captured.

PLA having the ability to destroy satellites may also hinder Taiwanese military from purchasing satellite relying technology and investing in satellite technologies.

Again another advantage of the technology is that it may deter the Japanese and US militaries from entering a conflict where they may lose more than they are willing to risk.

I look forward to your comments...