A $40 Million “Comedic Gold” Pissing Contest with the Chinese
Yesterday, Danger Room reported that the Administration’s rationale for shooting down the rogue spy satellite is laughingly bogus.
The Pentagon says it has to shoot down a malfunctioning spy satellite because of the threat of a toxic gas cloud. Space security experts are calling the rationale highly unlikely. "Having the US government spend millions of dollars to destroy a billion-dollar failure to save zero lives is comedic gold," one tells DANGER ROOM.
[snip]
So what could that other reason be?
Our veteran space security specialist believes there are several. To him, the satellite shot is a chance for the military to try out its missile defense capabilities; a way to keep secret material out of the wrong hands; and a warning to the Chinese, after they destroyed a satellite about a year ago. He shared some educated guesses:
My first thought is that MDA [Missile Defense Agency] is always looking for ways to pimp their systems and provide further justification that they work. The upcoming change in Administration is almost guaranteed to result in missile defense losing the top-level advocacy that it has enjoyed for the last several years. Any additional missions and justifications that the missile defense community can provide would increase the likelihood of their systems (and budgetary power) surviving.
An additional reason could be that destroying the satellite would prevent any chance of another nation getting access to any of the potentially sensitive technology on board. However, I have heard from other sources that supposedly the NRO [National Reconnaissance Office – the country’s spy satellite shop] is actually against the "shootdown" (and I hate that term – the satellite is not flying and is coming down regardless of whether or not it gets hit by a missile). Their absence at the press briefing could lend some weight to this rumor, although it could also be explained by the nature of the satellite and its still classified link to the NRO.
My real concern is that this is simply a knee-jerk reaction made by the Administration in response to the purported threat by the Chinese. Since the April 2007 ASAT [anti-satellite] test, there have been rumors and whispers going around that the Administration and like-minded individuals are looking for more sticks (instead of carrots) to use against China. While this "shoot down" is not a direct action against China, it would be a clear signal that the US can possess an active ASAT capability at any time if it so desires. That is a serious development as the previous US ASAT system using F-15s was mothballed in the 1980’s.
[my emphasis]
Today, Danger Room attaches a price tag to this "comedic gold."
Big bucks. "The attempt by the U.S. Navy to use an anti-missile missile to shoot down a potentially hazardous satellite will cost between $40 million and $60 million, Pentagon officials told CNN. "The missile alone costs almost $10 million."
This is basically a $40 million "comedic gold" pissing contest with the Chinese. Instead of paying for this pissing contest, we could buy 40 MRAP vehicle and save real lives of real Marines stuck in Iraq. But given the Bush Administration’s priorities, I can see why they chose the pissing contest instead.
Question, how many of Monica Goodling’s classmates does it take to build a failed spy satellite?
A – almost as many as it takes to figure out a way to shoot it down.
Here’s a good post on how only 17% of what America makes doesn’t kill people
http://www.pogge.ca/archives/001801.shtml#more
If you read the fine print on the links, you’ll find t hat 17% figure was for 1990; that’s nineteen years ago!
Yep, saw the 1990. Were you thinking things had changed much for the better since then?
Much more likely the opposite.
Hmmm, let’s see here:
Let’s do something that’s dangerous and counterproductive, lie about why we’re doing it, and not let on that our real reasons for doing it are more along the lines of stupid Ledeen-Doctrine chest-thumping than anything else.
That’s Bush policy in a nutshell. (See also: Iraq.)
these asshats couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn with the broad side of a barn
more precisely, the starwars defense system couldn’t hit water if it fell out of a fucking boat
what I don’t understand is how they’re gonna fake it on this one …
“what I don’t understand is how they’re gonna fake it on this one.”
Doesn’t it seem likely that a spy satellite would have some sort of self-destruct mechanism? [footnote #1]
So you shoot some missile (which we can call the Patriot II, tee hee) and blow up the satellite when the missile is nearby.
Then we chant U.S.A. for a while.
Footnotes
#1. Any similarity between this argument and the idea that all very tall buildings are prewired for implosion (to prevent the building from falling sideways in case of failure) is purely coincidental. This post should not be taken as a reason to spend the weekend reading about Building Seven. tee hee
no, it doesn’t seem likely
putting a “self destruct” mechanism in a weapon or satellite system isn’t really a good idea
kinda makes it easier for your enemy to destroy your stuff that way, by, you know, hacking the self destruct code an stuff …
this ain’t a star trek episode
and gene rodenbeery had no clue about safeguarding a weapons system
if it has Bush’s prints all over it, OR CHENEY’S, as per pattern, SOMEONE will likely die in the process. Personally? I’M ducking!
By the way, the Russians certainly aren’t fooled:
Gosh. Our transparent tricks once again fool no one but result in diminished credibility. Who would have imagined?
Yeah, just because this is the story arc of every damned Bush policy initiative, doesn’t mean this wasn’t predictable. (/snark)
Man, I gotta stop posting today. Nothing I write is being taken in the way that I intend.
Goodnight, Gracie.
It’s the easiest test of their missile defense system these guys could find, since all the other tests have shown it’s only good for hitting the broad side of a stationary barn. They have to demonstrate it can hit a moving target, and a de-orbiting satellite is a lot more predictable than a missile … they can take more than one orbit just tracking it, for one thing.
“Instead of paying for this pissing contest, we could buy 40 MRAP vehicle and save real lives of real Marines stuck in Iraq.”
How many schools like the one Christy writes about in her “Pull up a chair” column on FDL this morning could you fund with $40 million? And which would make more difference to more people in the long run?
Bob in HI
I wrote this last night on FDL:
Something does not compute, here.
We have a satellite which has not responded to human control since it arrived in orbit. We have a suggestion that the Navy shoot it down. But …
Did we know that the Navy was capable of shooting down satellites? armscontrol.org seems to have been of the opinion that such capabilities were not to be acquired and tested for several more election cycles:
Ship-board ABM capabilities were forbidden under the ABM treaty that Bush backed out of. One supposes that some other nations are not very happy to see this new capability, so what better way to introduce it than to use it “in the service of mankind”, rescuing some region from the danger of hydrazine (since when has that been a concern?).
I am lapsing far too easily into suspicion these days, but what if they just launched a big, inert target into orbit, waited a while, and then “saved” us from its falling on our heads by using a new ability that would not have been available if we had stayed observant of the ABM Treaty? The U.S. gets a free test of the system along with a PR coup?
Today I was thinking, after reading yesterday’s NYT article, that this is a 5000 lb satellite, with a heavy-walled tank and 1000 lbs of hydrazine (always presuming you can believe what you read …). What was this thing designed to do? That seems high on maneuverability and low on payload. This apparently is not one of your Keyhole-variety sats: ca. 10 tons and lots of optics.
Space pirates?
Is that what Georgie is really worrying about?
That the Chinese will eventually shoot some astronauts up there, latch onto this mystery satellite, and hijack some of the goodies?
Hey, George, thanks for letting all the world know about this satellite and its intelligence value.
Bob in HI
After reading that the Rooskies have a pistol on board their space station it is obvious they have chosen to weaponize space first.
We are clearly responding to this outrageous provocation in a measured manner.
Fire away!
-GSD
What is interesting to me, is that they will use a kinetic kill weapon, meaning the “bullet” will consist of “marbles”/”ball bearings” moving at high velocity and depend on impact to, what? and with the evidence being destroyed on re-entry anyway, how will they determine whether the intercept was successful?
Notice they have not informed the world where it will impact with/without interception, waiting to say, in effect, see, we “shot it down”!
Even if they miss, they can still claim a kill. Who will be able to determine otherwise?
IntelVet,
You are correct! There are too many unknowns in this affair and I am beginning to believe it is not what is being stated in the press. Too many things are not clearly being presented. The “fog” of “war” is being used to test a new weapon is my guess.
Listen, seriously, if the need to take out this space junk for security or hazmat concerns was on the up and up, you would never hear about it; they would just do it. Speculating on whether they are being disingenuous or not is a waste of time; of course they are, the only question is the why of it.
True, u r correct on the speculation, but after spent 22 years in the Navy as a Crypto, it just does not pass the smell test, in my opinion. The concern regarding the satellite is real, but the reason for using the missile just does not sit right me, form my point of view.
Perhaps a new and improved (and therefore more expensive) satellite will have to go up now that the billion dollar spy satellite is falling.
Let’s guess the new satellite will have new fangled toys such as lasers to shoot or threaten to shoot and destroy neighboring satellites if and when the mood strikes.
Heh, maybe that is what is on this satellite, and that is why they are so panicked at anyone finding debris.
vieravisionary @23 – Oh, we are in agreement on that I think, clearly something is up with the satellite; it was just more of a general observation from a lot of the comments, yours just happened to be the most recent and had opened with that part. My point in general was simply that no breath should be wasted on the issue of whether or not we are getting the straight story; of course we are not. When I see the Bush Administration constantly trying to sell pure, unadulterated crap, like they always do, I picture this guy.
When does Cheney get his star wars?
They seem to be running out of time.
Something is really wrong/deliberately deceptive with their whole rationale/timing for this missile/lump of metal thing.
What? is really going on?
They want/need to launch something at something.
If it is not some f**ked-up ‘lets speed-up the end of times so we can tell ‘god’ how great ‘we’ were’?. (/s), then ‘What is this cover for?’
‘What/whom is the ‘real’ target/point?
And, based on previous history/actions,
‘Who and Who’s companies? is/will ‘really’ get rich/power from this action/reaction?’
Armscontrolwonk has been having an excellent discussion on the shootdown (esp. the comments).
Two quick comments. I’ve seen it said in some parts that surely the hydrazine would burn up in reentry and never hit the ground; but remember the hydrazine right now is a giant chunk of hydrazine ice in a metal container, not a volatile liquid. Hydrazine did survive the Columbia disaster reentry. That said, even if it hit the ground, it would act like a very strong tear gas over about two football fields; so the idea that we’re spending $40M on the risk that those two football fields are in Kansas City rather than Cork’s back 40 is hard to buy.
I also tend to think that small electronics boards are precisely what you can be sure will burn up in reentry, so it seems hard to buy that’s the reason it’s being brought down.
And all that said, who knows what they told Bush? Generals like to shoot things. They may very well have told him all sorts of scare stories about hydrazine and technical espionage to get their way.
Is there any evidence beyond ‘they said so’ that the satellite in question is anything more than an inert target, free of frozen hydrazine, heavy tank, etc.? Is it possible that this entire scenario is an ABM test, pure and simple, coated with a PR story?
I have no idea, but if it is as big as they say it is, it is one freaking HUGE satellite. Thing must be about the size of a Greyhound bus as far as I can figure.
Mmmm. And it only weights 5000 lbs, if the NYT can be believed, whereas Keyhole (also bus-sized) weighed in at about 15,000 and later spy sats at 20,000. If you were making a target, you’d make it large — the ship-based system you intend to test needs a target larger than a warhead because (so I read) the closing velocity is half-again greater than when intercepting an ICBM: they would have to give the Aegis sensors a break. *wanders off muttering* (Something smells.)
Yeah, the reports on the size and weight of this thing don’t add up. See here.
Saw this last night , by somebody griping about the cost
” $40-$60 million? Why not just pay the Chinese to do it. ? They’d only charge $5 or $10M. Why not? We outsource everything else .”
That there’s fun-nee
behindthewheel, you might be right .(Anybody seen OJ lately? ;D) Kinda strange our satellite would fail , at the same time as the Chinese test.. This bunch is turning everybody into a foil-hat-black-helicopter-one-world-order-type nut .
*behindthefall* ^ (wrong place . Was @ a NASCAR site , awhile ago .;D)
behindthefall–good question, I asked over at armscontrolwonk…
There’s a thread on this at Making Light, where one of the comments is phrased as a guide for the press on what’s going on here.
Apparently what they plan to do is use one of the Navy’s ICBMs, and set it up so the final stage hits the satellite and they blow up together. We’re talking very low orbit (and getting lower all the time), so most of the pieces will hit atmosphere in a couple or three hours and burn up. It’s why they think this will work: the satellite has a known orbit, they’re tracking it carefully, and they have a system they’d like to try out that might just be able to reach it.
I gather that what happened was the satellite lost its radio receiver or computer somehow, so its kick motor never put it into its proper orbit, and it doesn’t answer when it’s called. This happens every so often, but usually physics is allowed to solve the problem. Here-and-now we have a government that wants to play with its toys.
Linky to the comment I mentioned.
5000 lbs is an SUV. Trash trucks run about 20000-25000 lbs when empty, for comparison. (I always wondered how useful running a landfill scale would be ….)
They might shoot at another satellite, claim to have missed, and oops,
sorry, we were trying to hit our own.
Chinese response:
“Oops, sorry, we were trying to flood the markets with UK Treasury notes.”
a constitutional glitch: http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_….._Wikileaks