Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Space Operations Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Scrutinizing The Swarms For Satellite Safety
SYSOP    11/10/2014 5:00:24 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
kevintk    Orbital mechanics ?   11/10/2014 9:13:11 AM
Question for someone who understands orbital mechanics: does each swarm tend to stay together as an intact entity, with more or less constant overall dimensions, or does it gradually spread out. I would think the latter because the velocities originally imparted to individual objects in the swarm would not be the same and also because objects at the bottom would have a little more atmospheric friction than those at the top. Just curious.
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       11/10/2014 12:22:42 PM
It will gradually form a debris ring roughly parallel with the mass-con's orbital equatorial inclination that forms the gravitational anchor for one of the orbital ellipse loci for the debris aggregate. At least that is the explanation for the rings around the outer gas giants. So far, Earth is the only planet in the inner rocky four that exhibits the same exact 'ring' phenomenon. Yes Earth has a 'ring' of its own, an artificial one on the equatorial plane of orbital launch vectors, which consists of the aforementioned satellites and all the other JUNK (nuts, bolts, scrap rocket parts, and other space vehicle debris), put into orbit.  Each 'particle' has its own unique orbit, but they all share the same 'belt'.
 
Hence we have:  the IADC (Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee).
 
 

Question for someone who understands orbital mechanics: does each swarm tend to stay together as an intact entity, with more or less constant overall dimensions, or does it gradually spread out. I would think the latter because the velocities originally imparted to individual objects in the swarm would not be the same and also because objects at the bottom would have a little more atmospheric friction than those at the top. Just curious.

 

 

 

 
Quote    Reply

Nate Dog    Was surprised at the article   11/10/2014 6:32:21 PM
Correct. The swarms don't stay coherent but do gradually spread. Also, they dont inhabit one particular neat orbit but usually a somewhat eccentric one which degraded as time, tide, minor impacts plus gravitational pulls from various diverse bodies (earth, moon) affect the swarm. At perigee it'll tend to skim a little bit more atmosphere then at Apogee, again changing both orbit and speed (same thing really) so the orbits degrade, increasing the chance of impacts on satellites, as well as leading to the eventual burning up of said swarm. 
I also thought it was a bit harsh implying that the chinese were intentionally trying to create clutter. Highly doubt it was a petulant throwing the toys out of the cot, if i can't use space, nobody can!. They were testing out an ASAT system. Was it irresponsible? Sure. That describes half of Chinese policy (same goes for US/Euro/Russian). Could simulations have given nearly as much data? Sure. Still, hard to miss what you can do with burning satellites in orbit showcasing your abilities to your adversaries (anybody that isn't chinese) as well as showing the plebs how well they are doing.
Its a cascading problem right now. It'll get worse before it gets better. 1 of 2 things will happen. 1, the barbarians win and this is all academic, 2, we sort our shit out,  get some ground based lasers to gently shift the orbits of all these small fragments so that they enter a controlled crash into our atmosphere, and we learn to stop shitting where we eat.
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       11/10/2014 6:50:23 PM
 
 
These BASTARDS violated their treaty commitments;
 
"Accession" is the act whereby a state accepts the offer or the opportunity to become a party to a treaty already negotiated and signed by other states. It has the same legal effect as ratification. Accession usually occurs after the treaty has entered into force.
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Nate Dog    Keffler   11/11/2014 9:40:49 PM
Jesus bud,
And what the hell are the Russians pulling in the Ukraine? Give up your nukes and we will guarantee your sovereignty. How well has that worked out for the Ukrainians?
Like i said, they're irresponsible assholes, but not malicious. They need space just like we do. Perhaps not to the same extent just yet, but they will.
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       11/12/2014 7:38:52 AM
I KNOW those barbarians, Nate. They are to be less trusted than the Pakistanis, and those people are utter SCUM.
 
They don't need space at all. They are unworthy. 


 
Quote    Reply

Nate Dog    Worthy or not   11/14/2014 12:58:40 AM
We do this together or not at all.
We won't get very far ahead if we need to keep dumping 3/4 of our annual growth into defence to keep that growth going. Rather than fighting barbarians, better to bring them along, help them come to us, give them the wonderment we have at this amazing place and drag them along.
Arrogant western idealistic thinking i know, but the shitholes they're in are just that, shitholes, and we lucky few born in the west should be aware of that. Naivette or not, i can only believe that if they knew what we know and had the freedom to do what we do, then they'd behave just like us.
If thats not the case, and we'll need to slaughter them all, then we'll have lost what little legitimacy we had in the first place to try and impose our way of life on them. 
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       11/14/2014 9:11:52 AM
I doubt that Chinese thieves, copycats, and liars can be dragged along with the rest of us. The current scum have to earn their place at the table, Nate. They are after all in their own words,  "Yi" to the West. They hate us for it, because we know how backward they really are.  
 
 
Current Australian government estimates are that China is doomed to massive political and economic dislocation within a generation. American estimates are a bit more optimistic. They will be meat on the American table in about two decades.
 
And the Chinese know it. Hence their current desperate so-called soft aggressions and attempts to bluff their neighbors.
"Speak softly and carry a big stick." Only cowards and blowhards bluster like the Chinese do.
 
Quote    Reply

Nate Dog    Interesting reading   11/15/2014 9:15:35 AM
Don't know that i agree with the tales of doom being professised in relations to declining work force.
Yes, its happening, but i doubt very much it'll be the massive disruptive disaster being postulated here.
Rather, i think like us, they will industrialise the work force, robotics there will play a greater part (like us) and they'll learn to do more with less (again, like us).
I doubt very much if China will ever present a legitimate challenge to American/Europan hegemony, but they are an immensely powerful regional power, and almost certainly an emergent super power (economically, we've been exporting money to China for 3 decades. They've got lots of it and that makes them a very serious player).
I don't know if you're right or wrong about Chinas inability to join the developed nations in trying to build a better world (I really hope thats what we're doing). I hope you're wrong.  
 
Quote    Reply

keffler25       11/15/2014 1:31:44 PM
Robotics and aging population unable to see to perform precision manufacture, plus China is a historic pandemic site with some of the worst public health care on the planet.
 
I would not be too sanguine about China's chances at all.
 
Plus money is a fungible that devalues when the labor capital shrinks. A brief perusal of China's natural resources particularly water and arable farm land shows them in the negatives already with them desperate to expand north into Russia and south into the Asian rice bowl. No titanium, no uranium, they are running out of cobalt, wolfram, manganese, silver, no selenium, no oil or natural gas, very little in the way of native gold anymore and their iron deposits are tapping out.
 
If I were Australia, I'd be arming to the teeth and legislating national investment controls against foreign exploitation. (Look at what China has done to the African nations it robs.).
 
These PRC fellows are 1937 Japan writ larger and a bit stupider.

Yes, its happening, but i doubt very much it'll be the massive disruptive disaster being postulated here.

Rather, i think like us, they will industrialise the work force, robotics there will play a greater part (like us) and they'll learn to do more with less (again, like us).

I doubt very much if China will ever present a legitimate challenge to American/Europan hegemony, but they are an immensely powerful regional power, and almost certainly an emergent super power (economically, we've been exporting money to China for 3 decades. They've got lots of it and that makes them a very serious player).

I don't know if you're right or wrong about Chinas inability to join the developed nations in trying to build a better world (I really hope thats what we're doing). I hope you're wrong.  


 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics