Rocket Blasts Off With Missile-Warning Satellite 60
fysdt sends this quote from a Reuters report:
"An unmanned Atlas 5 rocket blasted off from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on Saturday to put the first satellite of the Defense Department's new missile-warning system into orbit. Tucked inside the rocket's nosecone was the $1.3 billion Space-Based Infrared Systems (SBIRS) Geo-1 spacecraft, built by Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. The satellite, the first of four scheduled for launch over the next five years, is intended to provide the US military with early notice of missile launches and other reconnaissance services. The $17.6 billion SBIRS constellation, which includes sensors on host satellites, will augment and eventually replace the military's Defense Support Program satellites, which have been operating since 1970. The satellites scour the planet for heat trails produced by flying rockets and missiles."
Re: (Score:1)
Well let's hope that with the incredible power of a computer, they can distinguish commercial space traffic from global thermonuclear war.
Your typical first strike would involve lots of simultaneous launches. And the trajectories of icbm's would be suspiciously suborbital. Complicated equipment doing complicated pattern recognition. Built by the lowest bidder. What could possibly go wrong...
Re:It will be interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
Not to mention despite all the fancy electronics in the end it will come down to humans and whether or not they have any damned sense. I remember reading when the wall fell a couple of the "BTW did you know we came close to blowing your Yankee asses up?" articles, one where they came damned close to launching because the USA was doing a huge ePeen exercise with the Germans and the Russians thought it was a build up for launch, and on the second one of the commanders at one of their tracking stations actually detected what the computer thought was an ICBM headed to Moscow and despite orders refused to launch. He said 'It didn't make sense to me. The Americans would not just launch one or two birds, the sky would have been full. To launch only one or two birds would have been suicide" so he figured it was a glitch (turned out to be sunlight and clouds screwing with the detectors)
So in the end all we can do is hope the guy sitting there by the button has as much sense as that Russian commander. Because as any tech guy will tell you the fancier the system the more ways it can break horribly. Let us just hope they ain't basing their entire decision on whether to launch or not on these new fancy birds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ICBMs are not suborbital, an ICBM generally goes up to about 800-1100 miles at it's apogee.
Re: (Score:2)
correction: 'terrorist sensors' (Score:2)
if i were the US military I wouldn't give a flying fuck about a bunch of nuclear missles. Al Qaeda is going to use a ship in a harbor or a shipping container marked "Playstation 5" to deliver their nuclear holocaust.
in my uneducated, conspiracy theory opinion, the 'other reconnaisance' uses are the real reason of this program. eventually they will have the equivalent of Dr X's machine in X-Men, a gigantic globe where you can look up anybody on the planet and kill them with a thought.
Re: (Score:1)
Because the Russians don't have ICBMs and SLBMs anymore while the North Koreans and Iranians aren't working on them at the same time as the Saudis, Israelis, Indians and Pakistan don't all have MRBMs while also looking at orbital systems and ICBMs.
Its all about the terrorists.
yes. i remember the russian attack on sheboygan (Score:2)
and that time that Pakistan blew up Omaha, then there was the time that India invaded North Dakota.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It won't be affected by commercial launches, USAF and other intelligence agencies looking out for missile and rocket launches generally know where and when commercial and research launches are.
So if a rocket is launched from New Mexico or Kodiak or Baikonur, even in much higher volume, it's not going to cause trouble.
Now if a launch happens from Musudan-ri, its going to raise an alarm.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Not if you're protected by your trusty tin foil hat.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It seems to me that a rocket's heat signature would be so different, qualitatively and quantitatively, from any other infrared signal, that sensors optimized to detect missile launches wouldn't be much use for any other kind of spying.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure they won't spy on us with those satellites...
No kidding... I just farted and got a call from Osama Bin Laden and Elvis.
what about James Bamfords book? (Score:2)
according to James Bamford's book Shadow Factory, the USSID 18 is not respected like it was in the old days.
he has an interview with Adrienne Kinne who worked at the NSA center in Georgia (she was military intel in the 90s thru early 2000s).
yes, the NSA IG did a report finding 'no violations' --- they didnt even interview her though.
the law can say one thing, but in practice, the AG could write something like 'i authorize anything you need to do' and away we go.
besides, Cheney's Cheney (David Addington) sai
Was it sending reports as it was launched? (Score:1)
"Rocket heat trail detected 0.0 km away"
Ready, set, go! (Score:1)
Step 2: Put missiles in space.
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit.
Re: (Score:3)
Using money to kill people vs. using it for welfare.
I know what I prefer.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I prefer using a little bit of it for both.
In case you haven't noticed, the world is a messed up place. If we, as a country, don't have the ability to kill people efficiently, and in large numbers, we likely wouldn't exist as a country. Someone else, willing to spend money on killing people, would come in and take over.
As for welfare - I like the sig for "shutdown -p now" - "I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization." I'm not saying that we should support a professional welfare class,
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I think you'll find - in this Military Industrial Complex age - it's as follows:
Define the steps (Profit)
Step 1: Put missile detectors in space (Profit)
Step 2: Put missiles in space. (Profit)
Step 3: ??? (Profit)
Step 4: Profit. (Profit)
Step 5. Overrun original budgets (Profit)
pur whistleblowers in jail under espionage law (Score:2)
(profit)
Re: (Score:1)
Step 3: hook up to Skynet
Step 4: Whatever Skynet decides
Step 5: Assume the position
Re: (Score:2)
Want to play a game, America? (Score:2)
this game costs $1.3B, Lockheed wins, and you always lose.
Ready, set, go.
Oops. We have to cut teachers' pay again.
Re: (Score:2)
Now I get it (Score:4, Interesting)
An unmanned Atlas 5 rocket blasted off from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on Saturday
I occasionally see these stories and idly wonder (having grown up in the 60s and 70s) "when did they change Cape Kennedy back to Cape Canaveral"? I assumed it was recent since I've only noticed the "Cape Canaveral" references recently; but I never bothered to check.
Well, looks like it happened way back in 1973 - at the request of the residents. The facility retained the name "Kennedy Space Center" to honor JFK. I guess my childhood memories of the Apollo launch telecasts "live from Cape Kennedy" were so strong, I ignored anything I might've heard about the name changing back.
Actually, now that I think about it it - it probably had more to do with Barbara Eden and those sexy outfits. Major Nelson always went off to "Cape Kennedy", after all.
Cape Canaveral (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There were two top priority space related projects in the US in the mid 1950's. One was to develop an ICBM, with the Atlas becoming operational 1960-61. The other was to develop photo reconnaissance satellites as aerial reconnaissance was risky (Gary Powers) and provided limited coverage.
von Braun's team could have launched a satellite in January 1956, but Eisenhower gave strict orders that they were not permitted to do so. One reason was that if the Soviets were first to launch a satellite, they would hav
Re:Rocket or missile ? (Score:5, Informative)
A rocket is a kind of engine. A missile is something thrown. Most missiles have rocket engines and are often called rockets, but a steel rod thrown by a crossbow is also a missile.
In common use, a rocket used as a weapon is called a missile, even if the engine is still firing when it impacts
Re: (Score:3)
A rocket can be anything driven by a non-air-breathing reaction engine. These objects can range in size from a bottle rocket to a Saturn 5 (or larger).
A missile is typically an unmanned weapon that travels through air or space that is directed to a target, though common usage often excludes projectiles launched from guns and unguided rockets bearing warheads. There are two broad types of modern missiles, guided and ballistic. Guided missiles use aerodynamic surfaces to adjust the course of the missile betw
Re: (Score:2)
Is how Wiktionary defines "missile," while a "rocket" is
Evidently the authors of definitions #2 don't quite agree, but I think you can still see the difference.
So what's a
Re: (Score:2)
Scouring the planet (Score:2)
But never airplanes, drones, jets, helicopters, ships, cars and other road vehicles, trains, those on horse, donkey or camel back, whales and dolphins, big game animals, joggers or skateboard riders.
Should hope so (Score:3)
The Atlas 5 has never been man-rated. But it could be done.
Re: (Score:1)
You just stick a man in it, and if they make it, it's man rated ;)
Were you involved in the space shuttle program?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
-- Please someone kick me in the ass for responding to a AC --
You can't see me, but I'm currently playing the world's smallest violin for all the candyass whiners who behave as though, somehow, they should get a metal for discovering the perpetual unfair shittiness of the world.
moveon.org and the teabaggers can both claim their prizes now.
Missing Warning Satellites? (Score:1)