Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


First satellite collision sends debris into Earth's orbit at 25,000mph

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 13 February 2009
A CLOUD of hazardous wreckage is hurtling around the Earth at 25,000mph after the first major traffic crash in space.
Powerful military radars were being used yesterday to monitor at least 600 pieces of debris sent spinning into orbit when two satellites smashed into one another 491 miles above Siberia in Russia.

One was owned by the United States communications
firm, Iridium, which serves commercial customers and the US defence department, and the other was a 16-year-old Russian relay station, Cosmos 2251, that has been out of use for a decade.

The collision between the two is unprecedented in the history of space exploration.

"We believe it's the first time that two satellites have collided in orbit," said Lieutenant Colonel Les Kodlick, of the US Strategic Command.

The crash came to light when the US Space Surveillance Network detected a sudden new cloud of space-junk just as Iridium reported one of its satellites missing.

Nasa, the US space agency, ordered an immediate safety review to establish whether the International Space Station (ISS) – which has a three-man crew on board – might be in danger. A one-millimetre scrap of metal orbiting at 25,000mph can wreak as much damage to the ISS as a speeding bullet, while a piece the size of a tennis ball would be 25 times more powerful than a stick of dynamite.

Experts at Nasa's Johnson Space Centre in Houston, Texas, which has a whole department dedicated to monitoring some 18,000 items of space-junk, said the ISS was not at imminent risk, as it travelled about 280 miles lower than the smashed satellites' orbit.

Over time, however, the wreckage will cascade downwards – ultimately dropping out of orbit and burning up in Earth's atmosphere – and could yet force Nasa to shift the ISS's position to avoid another accident.

The space station has had to take evasive action eight times in the past, firing thrusters to move itself out of the path of space litter such as disused rockets, fuel tanks and satellites, or nuts and bolts from broken-down spacecraft. Even a spanner dropped during a spacewalk by the British astronaut Piers Sellers in 2006 had to be tracked by military radar to ensure it had drifted safely out of range.

There is also concern for the safety of scores of other satellites – both military and civilian – that operate at the same altitude as the collision site, and for the Hubble Space Telescope, which travels 360 miles above the Earth and has given scientists unparalleled glimpses of the universe for the past 18 years.

Nasa will continue to track the fall-out to pinpoint its path. "It takes a while for the debris to spread out and for us to get an accurate head count," one of its scientists said.

The collision was the worst space debris event since the Chinese blew up one of their satellites during a controversial missile test in 2007, littering orbit with about 2,500 pieces of shrapnel in a cloud 2,000 miles deep, and triggering an international political outcry.

Officials said neither satellite involved in Wednesday night's crash was to blame – there is no right of way in space, and no air traffic controllers.

Iridium said its crash satellite was one of 66 it had in orbit. It is to programme one of its "spares" to take its place.

Royal Air Force keeps watch on clouds of crash debris from radar station

A BRITISH radar station was yesterday tracking the debris clouds formed by the collision of the two satellites.

Operators at the tracking station at RAF Fylingdales, high on the North Yorkshire Moors, were attempting to assess the risk posed by the pieces of wreckage from the crash. The Fylingdales base forms part of a worldwide network of powerful radars and tracks all objects in orbit bigger than 10cm as well as providing early warning of any incoming ballistic missile attack.

A spokesman for RAF Fylingdales said: "Analysis of the radar data and information from the Space Surveillance Network confirmed the objects to be 'clouds of debris' from the two satellites.

"Work is now under way to identify how many items of debris have been generated by the collision, calculate if any of that debris is liable to come into contact with the manned International Space Station, and monitor any of the debris that may fall back to earth.

"This new debris is liable to be orbiting the earth for weeks if not months to come."

Nasa believes any risk to the International Space Station and its three astronauts should be low as it orbits about 270 miles below the collision course.

Dr Jill Stuart, from the London School of Economics, said the collision threw up interesting questions for "outer space lawyers" who will now have to sort out who will pay damages for the collision.

According to some reports, those managing the current Russian space programme have distanced themselves from liability saying the old satellite was launched by a previous Russian agency.





The full article contains 851 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 13 February 2009 12:14 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Space science
 
1

FTH22inarow,

13/02/2009 07:35:06
had to happen sometime
2

gus1940,

Edinburgh 13/02/2009 08:21:05
Orbital speed is 18000mph. If it went round at 25000mph it would go into space as escape velocity is 24000mph.
3

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 13/02/2009 09:12:56
Great. Just great. I moved outside the solar system years ago and now all this debris is heading my way.
4

Mike S,

13/02/2009 09:41:01
The US satellite flight path was over Siberia; I suppose there is no suggestion that it was carrying out spying activities and was taken out by the Russians?
5

AJ Fife,

13/02/2009 10:54:42
A Ruskie kamikaze attack?
6

livilion,

livingston 13/02/2009 13:56:31
Who writes these headlines?

"First satellite collision sends debris into Earth's orbit at 25,000mph"

So there were these two satelites see? and they crashed into each other, and they hit so fast the derbris went into earth's orbit doing 25,000mph.

Oh they were already in earth's orbit, and was it a side-shunt, a rear-ender, or a head-on collision?

Considering that sitting here at my desk I'm already skiting along through space at 67,000mph(not even considering how fast the planet itself is spinning)as old Albert used to say :it's all relative, eh no?
7

Fairfax,

13/02/2009 17:17:08
Here is a more useful report on the physics of the collision:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/02/12/kablam-satellite-collision-math-and-a-correction/

8

Transgenic452,

USA 13/02/2009 17:56:13
WHY DID THIS COLLISION COME AS A SURPRISE?

Something is VERY wrong here.

All these orbiting objects (satellites, debris, etc.) have supposedly been being monitored for decades, every single orbit known in excruciating detail.

A computer program is constantly checking for imminent collisions. I thought that was the whole intention for having the space monitoring network in the first place.

Taxpayers pay for this system, and it obviously failed.

An investigation should be initiated to find out why it failed, and how to keep it from failing in the future.

Otherwise, the money spent on the program is a complete waste and should be re-targeted to other projects that actually work.
9

Fairfax,

13/02/2009 18:18:56
Transgenic (8): "A computer program is constantly checking for imminent collisions. I thought that was the whole intention for having the space monitoring network in the first place"

This is false. Specifically, if you're referring to the US Space Surveillance Network, then its function is certainly not to predict collisions between minor satellites -- that is probably not possible given current accuracy of the measured data. The functions of the SSN include predicting when objects will re-enter the atmosphere, and whether these will erroneously trigger ICBM detection, as well as general interest in what's there and whether it might approach the shuttle or other key objects.
10

Transgenic452,

USA 13/02/2009 18:41:37
Fairfax: I can't cite sources, because I read the articles at least 5 years ago, but 2 separate articles stipulated that the SSN did in fact specifically monitor the orbits of ALL radar-observable objects that could pose a collision threat to US weather and communications satellites, the ISS, and the Space Shuttle.

Those pretty much cover everything from NEO to geo-syncronous objects.

The articles stipulated the monitoring was on-going and relied upon by multiple governments and corporations to help protect orbiting assets.

The most likely sources would have been Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, arksky.org, or Scientific American.

In addition there is this new (to me) source. I just now searched on "Space Surveillance Network", and from Wikipedia:
"Space surveillance accomplishes the following:...Inform NASA whether or not objects may interfere with the space shuttle or satellites and International Space Station orbits."

Which pretty much confirms my earlier statements.
11

Transgenic452,

USA 13/02/2009 18:50:23
Just noticed the Wikipedia citation is lifted almost word for word from
www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usspc-fs/space.htm

Other websites indicate the SSN also includes optical monitoring of orbiting objects as well.
12

Fairfax,

13/02/2009 19:21:47
Transgenic (10): "I read the articles at least 5 years ago, but 2 separate articles stipulated that the SSN did in fact specifically monitor the orbits of ALL radar-observable objects that could pose a collision threat to US weather and communications satellites, the ISS, and the Space Shuttle."

As I mentioned in my earlier post (9), it does monitor them, and it does indeed flag dangers for the Shuttle, together with a small number of other key objects. What the SSN cannot do is project accurately for all objects, in order to predict collision risks for all satellites, as you suggested was its task in your original post. That task would be much harder technically.
13

Transgenic452,

USA 13/02/2009 19:36:59
Fairfax: I don't understand why you keep insisting such tracking and warning capabilities are so difficult. They aren't, especially when you have nearly real-time observational data streaming in.

Computers make such tracking and predictive capabilities easy and fast. Even I have performed rudimentary satellite orbital tracking calculations (Ham Radio Satellites) and I know the SSN is a lot better at it.

I'm sure the constantly updated data are presented in terms of statistical probabilities of collision, but they are presented.

I thought it might help to extract some of the more relevant info re: the Space Surveillance Network. One really has to wonder why this collision apparently came as a surprise.
---------------------------

source: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usspc-fs/space.htm

"Of that number, the SSN currently tracks more than 8,000 orbiting objects....About SEVEN PERCENT percent (~600 ) of the space objects are operational satellites, the rest are debris....tracks space objects which are 10 centimeters in diameter (baseball size) or larger. "

"Combined, these types of sensors (radar/optical) make up to 80,000 satellite observations each day...from SSN sites such as Maui, Hawaii; Eglin, Florida; Thule, Greenland; and Diego Garcia, Indian Ocean. The data is(sic) transmitted directly to USSPACECOM's Space Control Center (SCC)....

Space Control Center
The SCC in Cheyenne Mountain Air Station is the terminus for the SSN's abundant and steady flow of information. The SCC houses large, powerful computers to process SSN information and accomplish the space surveillance and space control missions."
---------------------------


source: http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/track/overview.htm
"A modest satellite tracking radar or telescope typically costs a few tens of millions of dollars, while the more elaborate radars can cost well in excess of $100 million. " (note: there are a number of observation sites. Also, this does not
14

Transgenic452,

USA 13/02/2009 19:38:52
(continuation):

source: http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/track/overview.htm
"A modest satellite tracking radar or telescope typically costs a few tens of millions of dollars, while the more elaborate radars can cost well in excess of $100 million. " (note: there are a number of observation sites. Also, this does not include yearly staff, maintenance, and utility costs. Then of course, there are the on-going costs of the "SCC" and other assets and resources used to support the program. It is not a cheap program.)
15

Fairfax,

13/02/2009 23:46:06
Transgenic (13): "Fairfax: I don't understand why you keep insisting such tracking and warning capabilities are so difficult. They aren't, especially when you have nearly real-time observational data streaming in."

Tracking isn't difficult, but accurate numerical projection more than a few days into the future is. This is a much more difficult problem than you think.

"I'm sure the constantly updated data are presented in terms of statistical probabilities of collision, but they are presented."

The key point is that the variance of these estimates is too large to be useful. It would be possible to flag a warning that two satellites might be at risk of collision, but there would be many false alarms. For this reason, the USSSN prioritizes.
16

EPS,

Edinburgh 14/02/2009 00:29:27
#2 gus1940: Yes, you're quite right that orbital velocity is 18000 mph. The two satellites were in polar orbits, and the impact angle was almost a total broadside, 90°. The relative speed of the two will therefore have been around 18000*(sqr(2)) = 25000 mph approximately. Ms Goddard's figure is quite wrong in its context as you say, but I expect that's where it came from. The pieces of debris will have a wide range of speeds.
17

2dogs in D.C.,

14/02/2009 03:03:46
Dig out your old tin hats,people.
18

Diego Plasma Residue,

Hagerstown Maryland USA 14/02/2009 10:26:55
This reminds me of that old Devo tune "Space Junk"!
NASA & the European Space Agency ought to start constructing all new satellites to look & act like Spiny Norman?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.