Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
US missile hits 'toxic satellite'
complete article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7254540.stm
The US has successfully struck a disabled spy satellite with a missile fired from a warship in waters west of Hawaii, military officials say.
Operatives had only a 10-second window to hit the satellite - USA 193 - which went out of control shortly after it was launched in December 2006.
Officials were worried its hydrazine fuel could do harm, but it is not yet known if the fuel tank was destroyed.
The controversial operation has been criticised by China and Russia.
On Thursday, China called on the US to provide more information about the mission.
Russia suspects the operation was a cover to test anti-satellite technology under the US missile defence programme.
The US denies the operation was a response to an anti-satellite test carried out by China last year, which prompted fears of a space arms race.
Precision needed
The BBC's Jonathan Beale in Washington says this operation was hugely ambitious.
BROKEN SATELLITE
Owner: National Reconnaissance Office
Mission: Classified
Launched: 14 Dec 2006
Weight: 2,300 kg (5,000lbs)
1,134kg (2,500lbs) could survive re-entry
Carrying hydrazine thruster fuel
The operation went ahead hours after the space shuttle Atlantis landed, removing it as a safety issue for the military.
The satellite - believed by some commentators to be a radar imaging reconnaissance satellite - was passing about 130 nautical miles (250km) over the Pacific.
Earlier the military said it would use an SM-3 missile fired from the cruiser USS Lake Erie, which is posted on the western side of Hawaii along with the destroyers USS Decatur and USS Russell.
But it is not yet known how successful the operation was - the missile needed to pierce the bus-sized satellite's fuel tank, containing more than 450kg (1,000lbs) of toxic hydrazine, which would otherwise be expected to survive re-entry.
The Pentagon said confirmation that the fuel tank has been hit should be available within 24 hours.
US officials said without an attempt to destroy the fuel tank, and with the satellite's thermal control system gone, the fuel would now be frozen solid, allowing the tank to resist the heat of re-entry.
If the tank were to land intact, it could leak toxic gas over a wide area - harming or killing humans if inhaled, officials had warned.
Debris
Officials expect that over 50% of the debris will fall to Earth within the first 15 hours after the strike - or within its first two revolutions of Earth.
Left to its own devices, about half of the spacecraft would have been expected to survive the blazing descent through the atmosphere, scattering debris in a defined "corridor" which runs across the Earth's surface.
Professor Richard Crowther, a space debris expert with the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), said that if struck with the missile, about 25% of USA 193 is likely to survive the fall to Earth.
"The smaller the debris is the more likely you are to get burn-through. So if you fragment something before re-entry, less mass will survive to hit the Earth," he told BBC News.
Russian suspicion
But Russia's defence ministry has effectively branded the US operation a cover for testing an anti-satellite weapon.
The Russian defence ministry argued that various countries' spacecraft had crashed to Earth in the past, with many using toxic fuel on board, but that this had never before merited "extraordinary measures".
A spokesman for the Chinese foreign ministry in Beijing, Liu Jianchao, said China was concerned about the "possible damage to security in outer space and to other countries".
"We demand that the US... swiftly brief the international community with necessary data and information in time, so that relevant countries can take preventative measures," he said.
Last year, China carried out a test using a ground-based ballistic missile to destroy a satellite in space, prompting international alarm and fears of a space arms race.
The Aegis Guided Missile Cruiser Lake Erie has hit the ailing USA193 spy satellite while the device was still in orbit. Thereby preventing a dangerous fuel tank loaded with a toxic chemical from hitting the ground intact. The exercise has also demonstrated the US Navy's anti-satellite capability. The Chinese whined about the SM3 shot, which was ironic considering they hit a satellite in orbit last year. The weaponization of space is well underway.
What does that idiotic remark mean?Yikes break out them tinfoil umbrellas......................
What is that idiotic remark mean?
The Aegis Guided Missile Cruiser Lake Erie has hit the ailing USA193 spy satellite while the device was still in orbit. Thereby preventing a dangerous fuel tank loaded with a toxic chemical from hitting the ground intact. The exercise has also demonstrated the US Navy's anti-satellite capability. The Chinese whined about the SM3 shot, which was ironic considering they hit a satellite in orbit last year. The weaponization of space is well underway.
I am not going to remind you of any such thing, since I never said that to begin with. Moreover, I have not said one way or the other if I favor the weaponzation of space. But your distinction is rather thin. The actual weapon effect took place in space, regardless of the weapon's point of origin. Further, once weapons can down satellites, there will be weapons that counter anti-satellite weapons and so forth. Answering whether we should pursue weapons in space requires technical knowledge I do not possess; such as whether we have, or can maintain, a technological lead in that arena. What military advantage do we now have with our demonstrated anti-sat capability? Can the SM3 be countered?How is the ability to shoot FROM earth to space, weaponizing SPACE?
Ohh and remind us again how anti missile defense can not work.
This is already happening.Weapons in space will be the next race to escelation
