Who really thinks hydrazine is why gov wants to take spy sat out?

You can't fire thrusters when you don't have any power..

reply to post by jpm1602


Jpm1602, who do you consider our enemies and who does the U.S. consider to be the enemies? The Space Schuttle could of distroyed the satellite with the on board laser weapons system but it would be to close to the explosion. The reason the Shuttle probably did not capture the satellite is I feel it is nuclear. When and if the satellite is knocked out we on Earth will be able to tell how big of an explosion took place and it will give us an idea if in fact it was nuclear.

I believe this gives The U.S. a chance to test the new space offensive weapons system. I feel China showed its muscle because I believe we have been blinding their satellites. Rik Riley

Right to several...they have no contact, they have no control, therefore they can't burn the fuel off or dump it.

To whomever said something about the shuttle trying to rope it in. They don't do that nonsense. You don't send a shuttle in the vicinity of an out of control craft in orbit.

To the issue of the OP - nope, I don't think it's because of the hydrazine.

[edit on 2-17-2008 by Valhall]

All of you are wrong. Completely wrong.

The satellite is powered by a small nuclear reactor, and has been in space for years. So long in fact that it has now run out of fuel and has begun to slowly descend in orbit. America does not want to risk having an airborne Chernobyl type even occur, especially over it's territory.

The original story confirms much and was released just before the fired their new rail gun for us.

This was before the disinformation campaign was launched and even now Russia is saying that the satellite has nuclear material on board.

Google it and see with your own mind the truth that is hidden before you.

i have a question for anybody who may know. if this satellite is nuclear weapons platform wouldnt there be a great deal of fall out and what would be the ramifications of said fall out be? or maybe they just want to flex their muscle for china.

reply to post by trstno1


Trstno1, You are 100% correct on your assumption that the U.S. is retaliating against China. I told all my friends that I felt the U.S. was doing this because China is flexing it's muscles. China is building up a war machine unparalled in peace time history. The Chinese are taking the Trillions of dollars we send them and spending the money to build up their military to go to war with the U.S. Do not kid yourself our high ranking military officials behind the scenes are worried big time.

I spent several weeks over in mainland China in 1989 and knew by instinct we would be fighting them. The lead paint issue as you have figured out has been an on going thing. This has been going on for years and years but just has been brought to the publics attention. The food contamination was a dry run and why the hell are we buying wheat from China and dog and cat food? I will answer my own question because our trade difficit is so huge that this is the way the Chinese do business. Instead of giving us money for our products and technology they send there goods in exchange for money.

We are in a world of hurt in the U.S. and are Trillions in debt to China. When the default on the money owed to China starts and by the way it has already started how do you think they are going to get their money and real estate they invested in back it is called War.

If you were a private citizen in The United States and were in debt equal to the proportion to the U.S. you would be bankrupt many many times over. Well folks the fiddler has to get paid. Rik Riley

Originally posted by doctormcauley
All of you are wrong. Completely wrong.

Probably not the best approach to be taken cordially. Some people (like myself) haven't even posted a speculation on an alternative reason, so I don't know how I could be wrong.

reply to post by acurioushuman


I don't think anybody can "know" the answer to that question, for none here have the specs on a Nuclear space weapon platform.. just theories.

Myself, I am not as worried about fallout as I am an EMP burst that could knock out all electronics in the region it goes off over.

Or... its just a "coincidental" timely equipment failure that the gub'ment gets to test weapons out on.

people must realise that theoretically a satalite could have BOTH hydrazine fuel tanks [ fro attitude / manouvering thrusters ] AND a nuclear power source [ to power the main electrical bus ]

i have not got time to google the sats specs - so just saying , possibly

and yes , ANY fragment of a satelite falling into the hands of potential enemies is always a bad thing - esp if you can destroy it first - and use the oportunity for a weapons test / training exercise

Number one. They are adamant that the shuttle returns home before shootdown. This tells me their may be unexpected consequences. I do believe this is somehow tied to the China thing. I do believe tensions are very high now. Whatever they are concerned about is not hydrazine.

And you don't think the fact that USA 193 and the Shuttle/ISS orbits overlap have ANYTHING to do with that? Anything at all? The biggest difference is that the shuttle is 60-70 miles higher when they cross each other.

Sorry but i had to jump in when i read ebay, r u kidding, the usa government are worried about a piece of the machine being found and being sold on ebay, OK point one, dont u think they could monitor ebay, perhaps they even do, and then catch the culprit if it happened, or point two, theres enough talk about the gvernment monitoring this site, and with all their powers to boot, and high tech equipment, r u telling me they couldnt stop a sale on ebay, and if thats there only excuse well then excuse me, but i smell a rat, or two here, but then whose ever really going to know the truth, head count maybe, well thats all of us never knowing the real story.

I remember talking about this stuff in the late sixties and early seventies and I thought that they put fail safe self destructs in all of these satellites.

Does anyone know if this satellite has a self destruct or fail safe system?

As I remember it these self destructs could be activated even if there was a total system failure..

Here are a few of my thoughts. Let's say hypothetically it was secretly nuclear powered. I believe that the typical way to have a nuclear reaction is to have something like plutonium impact uranium at incredible speed. I don't believe a simple explosion would make it go nuclear. It would result in a radioactive debris field. Can some of you physicist types confirm or deny my thinking here?

That being said, shooting it down in orbit would likely cause a far worse situation than letting it fall from orbit. The radiation would spread over vast stretches of the earth and cause a negative effect on the overall health of those exposed. However, perhaps they are hoping that in doing so no one will be able to know details for certain. If it is blown to smithereens, can anyone give definitive truth as to whether it had a nuclear cargo? If it were allowed to fall and someone got their hands on the wreckage or even just photos that revealed it to have a secret nuclear generator, there would be some answering to do. And if it had proprietary technology (which it almost certainly would) that could be put into enemy hands.

Let's say hypothetically it is actually a nuclear weapons system satellite. First of all, duck and cover, because that is a very scary idea. Secondly, the enemy could NEVER find out. I believe that would be in violation of treaty and would result in immediate deployment and/or divulsion of similar satellites from our so called enemies. This would be a nuclear standoff that would make the Bay of Pigs pale in comparison. So if this were the case, I have no doubt the U.S. would wish to have the station blown up immediately before anyone found out.

Let's say hypothetically that the only real threat is the hydrazine. We can almost certainly conclude (from looking at the past's politics and cold war strategy) that this isn't simply for safety reasons. No matter what the intentions, it will be seen as a show of strength on the part of the Americans against our enemies, particularly Russia and China.

And finally, there is one last issue that makes the whole situation seem fishy to me. I recently watched footage of a Delta II rocket exploding.

youtube.com...

The history channel discussed that as soon as ground control knew something was wrong (a crack in one of the stage 1 fuel tanks) they pulled the switch and blew it to minimize collateral damage.

We are, therefore, to believe that the U.S. government placed a sensitive satellite into orbit without having a contingency plan? One would assume that if there was something dangerous, illegal, or highly classified that they would implement a failsafe. Some kind of independent remotely triggered self destruct. This seems logical, highly probable, and extremely more cost effective than shooting it down with a missile. Some might say that including such an explosive increases the danger of the project. However, keep in mind that at launch time it is essentially and potentially the biggest traditional bomb in existence. They know what they are doing. A small charge would be quite safe if placed on the right spot. If, for instance, that charge became heated enough to explode without being triggered, you probably already have bigger problems taking place.

These things being said, my assumption (and that is all it is without concrete proof) is that we are using this situation and an opportune time to test our missile defense system, with the secret benefit of flexing our muscles. I cannot believe that we do not have the capability to correct this problem remotely. If so, this shows a level of incompetence over the handling of either public safety or national security that should not be overlooked.

How are you supposed to activate a self destruct without power or computer control? They have neither on this satellite and it's just tumbling erratically through orbits.

OK makes sense, but the question i ask, will we really ever know whats going on, or what will happen, we seem to be speculating, ok fine, but dont u get the feeling theres something on this spy sat that really really is top secret, all u have to do is look at hows its described, in the press, SPY sat, i think its something to do with not wishing spy tech to be found by others, but then again what do i know, my monies on the word spy and then sat, must be something advanced and very very costly, proof of this Nada nothing, but then who has proof of anything else to do with this conspiracy

Hey Zaphod58,
The nature of a failsafe is that it is expected that something is wrong. That is why I said independent. If it loses power, there is a likelihood that you will have to destroy the satellite. So I would assume it's communications and power systems would be independent of that of the rest of the satellite. A second option would be a reserve battery that powers that system for a period of time following loss of power so that proper actions can be taken. Otherwise, as you pointed out (and engineers would hopefully realize) a powered down self destruct system is pointless.

Make no mistake, though. This is all conjecture on my part. I don't know for certain the limitations of our technology. Maybe I am asking/assuming too much of our space programs. I would think that something like this is not only doable but in practice (either publicly or behind the scenes), but perhaps I am mistaken. If we currently truly do not, then I would propose that it would be a worthwhile endeavor to increase safety, national security and healthy diplomatic relations with other nervous parties.

Even my clunky old pc had a battery that kept the clock working when it was shut down/switched off.

If the designers of these spy satellites cannot inbuild a $5 battery that has the capacity to trigger a self-destruct, or re-communicate with ground control, then they get what they deserve.

Trouble is, it could backfire on us!

I am certain that there are some in the US American government who are sold on this idea because they want to show China what they can do.

But remember, boys and girls, every time the USA's finger is involved in the Far East the USA actually has its eyes on Russia (or the former Soviet Union).

This muscular display of blasting the satellite is meant for Tsar Vladimir Putin's consumption as well as for his commrades.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
How are you supposed to activate a self destruct without power or computer control?

They have neither on this satellite and it's just tumbling erratically through orbits.

Fail-safe.

Loss of nominal communications with ground control automatically triggers on-board destruct device.

Which was either NOT included in this bird's design specifications; or failed to function when the bird "went deaf" as claimed.


Are we even certain that this was a spy-sat?


Granted, that's the story Washington is handing us at the momment. But I've come to grow a healthy distrust of the "hand that feeds me".


Perhaps we should be less concerned with hydrazine and possible RTG's, and focus more on what was the mission of the satellite concerned, if at all possible.


I do not think that this bird carried any nukes. If it did, detonating it at altitude would cause a dramatic spike in nuclear radiation, visible to detectors world-wide. The amount of radiation recorded would easily discount the source as being merely a failed RTG, and would result in many angry and retaliatory fingers being pointed at the US.

If there are nukes on-board, and you are fairly certain that it's not going down in "unfriendly" territory; let it fall on its own, cordon off the crash zone, and clean up the debris.


But what if what is about to de-orbit is actually a Non-nuclear Space Weapon? ie."Brilliant Pebbles", or "Rods from God"?


The most Damning components from such a weapons system might very well survive an uncontrolled re-entry; their survival, and thier undeniable association with the US government, might prove to be difficult to explain if exposed to world-wide consideration.


Far better to try to destroy the evidence in space and have it disbursed over a much wider area. Thus the surviving pieces would be harder to find, and it would be easier for US officials to deny that any two pieces of re-claimed debris had any Provable relation to each other, and could in no way be part of an operational US space weapon system!.

Plausible Deniability...Part and parcel of the spy game.