[FPSPACE] blowing up satellites in orbit

[Keith Gottschalk]

        JimO has recently been arguing persuasively that the Pentagon
had rational reasons to be worried about the possibility of a one ton
hydrazine ice block e.g., falling onto the head of an ambulance lawyer  
 :)

      I do think that the Pentagon should have waited until the
satellite's apogee dipped below 200 kms altitude before pressing the
trigger, so as to leave no debris in orbit for very long.

       But I have been told something interesting by a delegate to
umpteen meetings of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer
Space. He said that when China blew up one of its satellites last year,
he saw the biggest protests by a larger range of countries on CUPUOS
than he had ever seen on any other issue.  By contrast, when the US
delegate made repeated presentations, with follow-ups at subsequent
meetings, on the slipping hydrazine ice block, there were no protests,
and only one request for extra information.

      It shows that playing open cards from the start can make even
many sceptics acquiesce in a controversial decision. By contrast, the
PRC delegates were simply evasive and unconvincing. They apparently did
not even attempt to make out a political case. Neither could they refute
a top US official noting that this PRC big bang left 17 000 pieces of
orbiting shrapnel big enough to be tracked on US radars. Which are
certainly not things that should hit a STS wing leading edge nor cockpit
windscreen.

        PRC reps could have quoted official USG policy documents in the
public domain about the USG asserting it s full-spectrum space
domination, and denying anyone it considered an enemy access to space, &
incapacitating their space assets, and argued that the PRC needed the
same capabilities to defend its space assets. Different countries would
have responded to that with a spectrum of attitudes. But their evasion
convinced no one. 

      Leaving 17 000 pieces of orbiting shrapnel behind you is not
being a good space neighbour. I propose that space powers should be
required to pay, pro rata to their space debris per year, funds into a
UN Trust Fund to be capitalized. Then, as & when future development of
SSTO RLVs, & ion drive, makes it technologically & financially feasible
to launch an automated space scavenger vehicle perform the role of an
orbiting vacuum cleaner, starting at the 800 kms orbit no doubt, the
tenders can go out. If it takes two decades or longer before this is
feasible fine, the funds can earn interest that much longer.

Keith
-------------- next part --------------
All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer 
http://www.uwc.ac.za/portal/public/portal_services/disclaimer.htm