DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
kinda like our tax money, tarp, etc.
ReplyDeleteAnd they want to strap a bunch of guys on top of the biggest firework ever made by man and shoot them to Mars? Sounds fine to me, "Here's your Sign".
ReplyDeleteBut we are expected to accept their "data" about climate without question.
ReplyDeleteSo they can't determine when or where. So what. I'd say it takes a whole lot of smarts to design, build, launch, and use that satellite for over a decade. You read comments like the first three, and then you don't wonder why folks think the Eastern Shore is backwater.
ReplyDelete"like" button for 740
ReplyDeleteAn amateur skywatcher in Blaine,Washington has captured footage of the satellite plummeting to earth.SPACE.com has the video and more info.
ReplyDeleteWith all the other satellites and crap in space, I can't understand why they were unable to track this thing.
ReplyDeleteWas somebody asleep at the monitor? Their 'star wars' technology is supposed to be able to detect a missile firing from anywhere on the planet, so why?
The "clueless" in the headline is uncalled for. This is a dead satellite, with no transmitter. NASA, nor even the DoD, can track every satellite and orbital space debris (there are presently 16,315 objects in orbit) on a 24 x 7 basis.
ReplyDeleteIf it came down over the Pacific, there would be no way for NASA to know where. They don't waste taxpayers' money with floating detectors looking for falling orbital debris in the middle of the ocean -- you should thank them for that.
Perhaps the DoD, using a DSP early warning satellite, might have detected it as it burnt into the atmosphere. But the question is: Would they release that info to the public?
To call NASA "clueless" in this case is a clueless statement.
NASA, nor even the DoD, can track every satellite and orbital space debris (there are presently 16,315 objects in orbit) on a 24 x 7 basis.
ReplyDeleteWere they not tracking it before it entered our atmosphere?
Um I think now we have radar technology..... DUH
ReplyDelete9:09,
ReplyDeleteNo, they were not "tracking it before it entered our atmosphere."
Orbits are quite predictable. For most orbits, you only need to get three points within a short period of time and you can predict an orbit for many revolutions to come.
Geosynchronous satellites can be "tracked" 24x7, but virtually no satellite in low earth orbit is, nor can be. And we don't need to.
It's important to point out again, as mentioned above, that UARS was dead -- it had no working transmitter on board. NASA doesn't keep track of these orbits, the United States Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) does. The only way to "track" these objects is through optical or radar. And with something as low as UARS, the footprint wasn't very big, so if it didn't pass within view of a USSTRATCOM optical or radar site, then it wasn't "seen." Normally, that isn't that big a deal because tracking something once every day or so is sufficient to determine and update its orbit.
However, the lower the orbit the more drag due to an orbiting object hitting upper atmospheric molecules. Changes in solar flux and the uneven distribution of the earth's gravity also begin to play a much larger role as an orbit gets lower.
When they become very low, orbits become more unpredictable, and therefore need to be redefined more often in order to know how high it is going to be just 90 minutes in the future.
In the case of predicting a re-entry, it becomes even more complicated. The upper atmosphere is constantly expanding and contracting, and is uneven in its density.
To sum all this up: 1) No one, no agency was "tracking" UARS as it crossed the Pacific. 2) Even though a day earlier, its orbit could have been predicted within a couple percent, on its last day it would have been much more difficult. 3) Even if its orbit was well known to the second, it still would have been impossible to know exactly at what point the atmosphere would have been dense enough to slow a moving 17,000 MPH object to the point it would have lost enough momentum to fall to earth.
There have been hundreds of man-made objects observed falling from orbit and burning up in the atmosphere. None of their re-entries have been predicted any better than within a couple of hours.
gues what i was cutting grass and found a pile of bent and tangled metal in my backyard,its about the size of a ford fiesta.never saw it before,think it might be part of thesatellite. if anybody wants the can have it for free if they come remove it.i need the space to park a ufo thats coming next friday
ReplyDelete10:01,you should write monalogues for David Letterman.Your stuff is funnier than what he's said lately.
ReplyDelete9:48 PM
ReplyDeleteThat's how hoax's get started, you sprinkle a little truth with the bs. lol
6:52 AM,
ReplyDeleteI'm waiting . . .
I'm waiting . . .
ReplyDeleteSeptember 27, 2011 8:20 AM
For?
9:19,
ReplyDeleteFor 6:52 to point out which part is "bs"
His silence says it all.
USSTRATCOM is now reporting that the UARS satellite entered the atmosphere at 14.1S, 170.2W, with the time known to ±1 minute. This point is just west of Samoa and about 2,500 miles south of Hawaii. It was heading northwest at the time, and would have scattered debris over about a 500 mile swath. No Pacific islands are near that path.
ReplyDelete9:19,
ReplyDeleteFor 6:52 to point out which part is "bs"
His silence says it all.
September 27, 2011 1:48 PM
I wasn't silent. I waited for you to answer but you took too long and I have other things to do.
And actually, I had already sent in a post showing where you were wrong, and boy what a task that was.
I even included links to the articles I used to de-bunk your bs, but Joe won't allow links in comments so it was never posted.
Regardless, it seems in my absence someone else has taken you to task and partially shown where you were wrong.
Sorry to bust your balloon but I simply wasn't here to answer your too long response.
If you are going to act like a know-it-all, at least have the facts on your side. ALL OF THEM.
And notice I went back two or three pages just so I could answer your bs
ReplyDelete7:01,
ReplyDeleteWhat are you talking about? You posted nothing. And who took me "to task"?
I've worked with spacecraft tracking since 1974 and with orbital mechanics since 1997. Nothing I've written is even controversial, it is entirely factual. Just trying to help out the person who thought NASA was "tracking" these objects the whole way.
Sorry that I threw pearls before the tin-hatted conspiracy theory crowd.