Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

shooting down satellites

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • shooting down satellites

    Am I the only one who thinks the whole "hydrazine" argument is for PR purposes?? I bet that sucker is calculated to land in a densely populated area, and if they don't whack it off-orbit now…

    Go get 'em, Pearl Harbor!

    pax

  • #2
    Re: shooting down satellites

    If the satellite could fit in the space shuttle cargo bay and if the space shuttle was a more reliable transport system, they could have used it to pluck the satellite out of orbit months ago and bring it back to earth.

    That not being an option, I also echo the sentiment of "shoot it down".
    I'm still here. Are you?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: shooting down satellites

      Originally posted by Pua'i Mana'o View Post
      Am I the only one who thinks the whole "hydrazine" argument is for PR purposes??
      Well, it is a spy satellite.

      Although I'm sure some NASA geek is going to come and explain why it uses such a toxic fuel.
      Beijing 8-08-08 to 8-24-08

      Tiananmen Square 4-15-89 to 6-04-89

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: shooting down satellites

        You'd have to inhale a lot of concentrated hydrazine over an extended period, for it to do you any harm. It's the "spy" aspect (as Random noted) that explains the decision.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: shooting down satellites

          Originally posted by Leo Lakio View Post
          You'd have to inhale a lot of concentrated hydrazine over an extended period, for it to do you any harm.

          Uh......no.

          Hydrazine is some nasty stuff. Google 'hydrazine' and 'msds'. And what you find on the internet is at best 35% active. Rocket fuel is typically 98-99.95%active.

          It is used commercially as an oxygen scavenger in boiler systems. I can bring you some if you want to test your theory.

          But I wouldn't recommend it.
          You Look Like I Need A Drink

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: shooting down satellites

            From the EPA:
            Effects to the lungs, liver, spleen, and thyroid have been reported in animals chronically (long-term) exposed to hydrazine via inhalation.
            From Guy Raz's report on NPR:
            Hydrazine is a propellant fuel used aboard rockets. It's toxic — similar to ammonia or chlorine. But to die from hydrazine exposure would require standing around and breathing it in for hours. And it dissipates and evaporates rapidly.
            As one astrophysicist (name withheld by request) informed a bunch of us:
            Hydrazine is quite toxic, and the stated fear is that people coming into contact with hydrazine can get sick (and perhaps seriously ill). This is the same warning issued to the public when the Space Shuttle Columbia broke apart over Texas. Some pieces of the shuttle landed fairly intact, including a hydrazine tank. Hydrazine is, in fact, toxic, but it is also very volatile and unstable. It is unclear just how much of a danger the hydrazine poses. It breaks down readily, so even if it is spilled, there is probably little danger of long term environmental damage. If the tank ruptures during reentry, then the hydrazine is so volatile that it will be long since gone by the time the tank reaches the ground. If it ruptures on the ground, then the contamination is likely to be localized.
            That doesn't strike me as being enough of a danger to justify the military response. I'm much more likely to believe this is an opportunity to test the capabilities of our ballistic missile defense system, since prior testing was inconclusive, at best.

            If that's the case, frankly, it does seem like a prime opportunity - but I would rather know about that, and not be told some flimsy overkill tale about public safety. No causal relationship between hydrazine and any health problems has ever been established, but anecdotal links have. However, those anecdotal links involved exposures over many days, weeks and months.

            Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Chairman Gen. James Cartwright cast the threat from the satellite this way: Even if the hydrazine were released, he noted, the effects would likely be mild -- akin to chlorine gas poisoning, which can cause burning in the lungs, and elsewhere. The area affected would be "roughly the size of two football fields [where you might] incur something that would make you go to the doctor."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: shooting down satellites

              LOL Leo. Looks like you have been scouring the internet.

              "breaks down readily" kinda like this?

              N2H4 + O2 = N2 + 2H2O

              It will suck all the oxygen out of any immediate space. Death most likely by asphyxiation, not from acute effects of hydrazine exposure. "dissipates and evaporates rapidly" makes it an even more lethal. As a vapor it is slightly heavier than air, so find a tall building if you are near the point of impact. Poor way to kill someone though as traces can be detected in the blood.

              "volatile and unstable" is code for it has a good change of blowing up which is why it is used as a rocket fuel. Lots of things can cause it to spontaneously explode. Death by rapidly elevating body temperature.

              I used to wear a hydrazine monitor in a previous life. Offer still stands. I think the point can be made with less than 50 ppm. Will need you to sign a waiver though. And a rewrite of your will

              Now..... there is a lot more other things that can mess you up and we are around them almost every day. Even with all the molecule talk going around this is not about public safety. This situation is just a convenient reason to blow something up in space. Don't want this thing landing in the wrong place.

              LOL again at you quoting someone from the JCS. You, of all people, should never trust something quoted from the JCS. "akin to chlorine gas poisoning" "incur something that would make you go to the doctor" LMAO.

              Let me know if you have any other chemistry questions.
              You Look Like I Need A Drink

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: shooting down satellites

                I heard a bobblehead news reporter say something along the lines of: "Critics say it's only being shot down because it's a spy satellite and the US doesn't want the technology falling into the wrong hands." My first thought, "What, the critics want it to fall into enemy hands?", before I figured out that the so-called critics were actually complaining that the powers that be weren't being up front about the reason for shooting it down. My second thought was "This is cool, I hope it works."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: shooting down satellites

                  Originally posted by nachodaddy View Post
                  LOL again at you quoting someone from the JCS. You, of all people, should never trust something quoted from the JCS. "akin to chlorine gas poisoning" "incur something that would make you go to the doctor" LMAO.
                  Sorry - I was trying to turn to a variety of sources, and I thought the JCS (which I got from Fox News, of all places) would provide an "official" "administrative" "balanced" perspective to go up against a story quote from the lefties of NPR.
                  Originally posted by nachodaddy View Post
                  Now..... there is a lot more other things that can mess you up and we are around them almost every day. Even with all the molecule talk going around this is not about public safety. This situation is just a convenient reason to blow something up in space. Don't want this thing landing in the wrong place.
                  Hell, yeah - there's hydrazine in tobacco smoke, for that matter. My original point was that the "hydrazine" part of the story - as reinforcement of Pua`i Mana`o's thread-starter - is a very weak explanation for blowing up this failed satellite - and you seem to be in some agreement there (as highlighted above). I'd rather the administration announced that it was as you noted; I'd buy that explanation more. It would be more reasonable (imo) to say "we need to protect our technology" - it isn't about any information gathered by the satellite, since it didn't work once it went up.

                  (While writing this post, I see glossyp makes a similar point.)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: shooting down satellites

                    Originally posted by Leo Lakio View Post
                    Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Chairman Gen. James Cartwright cast the threat from the satellite this way: Even if the hydrazine were released, he noted, the effects would likely be mild -- akin to chlorine gas poisoning, which can cause burning in the lungs, and elsewhere. The area affected would be "roughly the size of two football fields [where you might] incur something that would make you go to the doctor."
                    Well, a Marine nicknamed "Hoss" has a lot more credibility in that quote than in this unreleased first quote:
                    "Heh, ah allus wanted to shoot me one a' them!"

                    PMRF could have said "In a cost-saving measure, today the Navy announced they'll be shooting down one of NSA's satellites instead of launching their own target."

                    It's been nearly 14 years since USS LAKE ERIE subdued Aiea with just two rounds. I wonder if they'll ever stop hearing about that...
                    Youth may be wasted on the young, but retirement is wasted on the old.
                    Live like you're dying, invest like you're immortal.
                    We grow old if we stop playing, but it's never too late to have a happy childhood.
                    Forget about who you were-- discover who you are.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: shooting down satellites

                      wow. After reading the theories about spy intelligence falling into the wrong hands, I continue to be convinced that its about heading for some densely populated location, like the eastern seaboard or Europe. The potential for mass carnage will getcha front page headlines, even if they aren't going to specifically say so.

                      And speaking of not saying anything, notice the expected location of where it will currently land is NOT being publicized? How could they "not know" enough to recommend blowing it off-course so that they "would know"?

                      pax

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: shooting down satellites

                        Originally posted by Pua'i Mana'o View Post
                        And speaking of not saying anything, notice the expected location of where it will currently land is NOT being publicized? How could they "not know" enough to recommend blowing it off-course so that they "would know"?
                        Maybe we should ask Charlie Epps who has NSA clearance.

                        FWIW, it's more practice for the US Navy (who have been shooting down dummy rockets near Kaua'i).

                        Not like North Korea can hit us.
                        Beijing 8-08-08 to 8-24-08

                        Tiananmen Square 4-15-89 to 6-04-89

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: shooting down satellites

                          Originally posted by Random View Post
                          Maybe we should ask Charlie Epps who has NSA clearance.

                          FWIW, it's more practice for the US Navy (who have been shooting down dummy rockets near Kaua'i).

                          Not like North Korea can hit us.
                          Unless you live on Guam.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: shooting down satellites

                            Originally posted by glossyp View Post
                            Unless you live on Guam.
                            And for that I thank my dad and the Sakada generation.

                            No offense to the people of Guam. I just won't forget you when you're gone.
                            Beijing 8-08-08 to 8-24-08

                            Tiananmen Square 4-15-89 to 6-04-89

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: shooting down satellites

                              Besides the other theories being tossed around here, how about adding in that maybe "we" just want to prove to "others" that we can shoot down a target, so don't mess with us. In other words, we'll still be here to retaliate if you try anything.
                              Now run along and play, but don’t get into trouble.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X