China tests ASAT

Status
Not open for further replies.

fishhead

Banned Idiot
I agree, mining the space is pretty nasty thing.

But anybody don't think Chinese will do the nastiest thing when they feel threatened by somebody? I think when US starts to deploy the space based weaponary, then it's the time China will pump steel balls into the space, until everybody sits down to talk. It's the open talk in China.
 

alopes

Junior Member
There is the question if that ASAT test is or isn´t a starter of an arms race in space.

I think if one would consider an arms race starter it would have to come back to the 70s since the one who start a capabilitie is the one who open the doors.
Also one could consider that, if USA declares that the space above earth is of its dominion from the military point of view from now onwards, China is only answering that the space has no owners and that it makes USA a starter of the arms race and not China.
Also one could think that the NMD systens like the Kinect kill vehicle that intercept warheads in space is also a starter of militarization of Space, in this case to the loss of China deterrent.
So one could consider that a Global Strike Capabilitie using a space vehicle as also the start of arms race in space.

My conclusion is that China is only answering to some country that the dominion of Space can be challenged with no much money and no much technologie in relatively comparisons to other countries Research and Devolopments of Weapons in Space like the Global Attack space plane for example.
 

Sea Dog

Junior Member
VIP Professional
You stated that it is not a big deal or overly difficult. But that is my question (a genuine one). Unless the Russians or the Americans or anyone else for that matter have demonstrated that they also could do it the way it was recently done , empirical evidence if you like, your assertion (that is not overly difficult) is for now simply that. An assertion.


Regards,
Michael

Hi Michael. Actually, in not so many words, I admitted I was wrong in my earlier assumption. :) This was, however based on an early report from someone else. Like I said, it looks like the Chinese (MSNBC article) shot it directly in the path of the orbital motion of the vehicle as it was approaching it's descending node. That is where it will traverse to the southern hemisphere. Still in-plane, but from a more difficult profile than what was propagated in another article. But does it really matter? All I know is there are many people who use LEO constellations for their satellites. Most are commercial users. I don't think this test was very constructive from that point of view. China proved without a doubt that they can hit a satellite in it's orbit. But it's still correct to point out that it's not so difficult to do it. It has been noted that if you can put a satellite in orbit, you have the potential to knock it out. China went from "potentially capable" to "capable" with this test.
 

fishhead

Banned Idiot
But it's still correct to point out that it's not so difficult to do it. It has been noted that if you can put a satellite in orbit, you have the potential to knock it out. China went from "potentially capable" to "capable" with this test.

You have no idea about what you talk about, they're totally different things.

Using a sat to destroy a sat is not particular hard thing, you just need to co-orbit them to close enough, timing is not too imortant here. But a direct hit, esp the head-on is a darn hard thing to do.

A sat at 850km orbit goes at the speed 7.4km/s to the ground, if the hit is head-on, you can add whatever the speed youself, which is > 10km/s as for reletive speed. Here processing power is ctrical, imaging sensor is critical, control timing is critical, control thrust is critical.... everything.

It's one of the most difficult engineering challenge.
 

Duran

New Member
Well, there is an arguement to be made for economies of scale. ...

I agree with you. War in essence is competition of resources allocation between confrontation parties. Some of China's newly developed weaponry, especially for navy vessels, is expensive because of lacking economic of scale. I think that's because they are trying to tune up the best available platform. But it will be a different story for the launching of satellites.

Simply compare basic economic data of two countries, we can tell the difference. The GDP/per capita of China is less than US$2,000, and US is US$40,000. Furthermore, when consider about the unit labor cost of professional technical personnel in space industry, US is totally in competitive disadvantage. The following article might provide some proof.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


(By the way, Jeff, thank you for sharing with us your brilliant book, it is very popular among members of this forum. I just downloaded and will find time to read it.:) )

......
More generally though, the more I think about this, the more I wonder if China was doing this just on its own.

The sanguine tone of the Russians maked me wonder if this is an SCO endeavour. Russia of course has an understanding with the US which precludes it from active participation, it does however have much technical expertise and of course, Substantial tracking facilites.....
There is a saying, that China's recent series actions have something to do with Japan and US recent move. First, after Shinzo Abe sworn in, the authority renamed 'Japan Defense Agency' into 'Ministry of Defense' on Jan. 9th, 2007. Which indicates Japan's endeavor to a 'normal' country. Second, during Abe's visit to Europe, he expressed Japan's intention to join NATO. Third, Japan-US will hold a joint exercise near China.

I guess Russia was fully informed about the test based on Japan's intention to joint NATO. The territory dispute between Russia and Japan have not yet been solved. The encirclement is too obvious.
 

fishhead

Banned Idiot
This is one of the splendest engineering job I ever see.

A missile hits a target 850km away, at the speed of 7.4km/s, only 3m2 in size, in a head-on way.

A relative hit speed of 10km/s means the error level is 0.1ms, the control level has to be 0.01ms, if you want to hit the target. You even don't know how a chemical thrust can achieve 0.01ms level control today, it's a big puzzle now, let alone other parts of the equation.

Is that a easy job?
 

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot
Re: Russia Wary of China's Anti-Satellite Capabilities

I agree with those who view this development in perspective. A chain is as strong as its weakest link- since the US & Japan are so dependent on space assets it only makes sense to show the capability to even the odds- one has to recall the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and NK
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of USAF RC-135S Cobra Ball reconnaissance aircraft. Here is a view from another angle-
Intelligence Brief: Russia Wary of China's Anti-Satellite Capabilities
Drafted By:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China's recently acquired ability to disable space-based satellites received due attention by practically every major power around the world. Much of the analysis surrounding the January 11 test has centered on the threat that this capability poses for the United States. Clearly, the U.S. position in space has been somewhat compromised by the Chinese since more than half of all artificial satellites in Earth's orbit are American, and Washington stands most to lose if China expands its space capabilities.

In reality, however, China has a long way to go before it can openly and directly challenge U.S. dominance in space. Research and development, manufacturing, testing and fielding of any future Chinese anti-satellite system will be answered by the United States and its allies. At the moment, the United States has both the funds and the abilities to field extensive counter-measures to Chinese space advances, a cost many other countries would find prohibitive.

Lost in the chorus of analysis is how Russia likely perceives the Chinese test. Although Russia has been mentioned by most analysts as one of the concerned states, nearly every assessment has centered on the United States. Clearly, it is not popular today to argue that Russia considers China a potential threat. Numerous official visits and even joint Sino-Russian military exercises seem to underscore the developing relationship between China and Russia. Both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Hu Jintao take every opportunity to underscore the "friendship and cooperation" between the two states in trade, military ties and diplomacy. Still, China's sudden breakthrough in space and anti-satellite technology did not go unnoticed in Moscow.

First, Russia has many of its military, intelligence and even communication satellites in low Earth orbit, somewhere between 320 to 804 kilometers (200 to 500 miles) above ground. Such distance puts them within easy reach of China's new capabilities. Beijing, for example, destroyed its aging satellite at approximately 865 kilometers (537 miles) above ground.

While Russia has advocated many changes to its military doctrine -- including greater funding for its high-tech military assets -- it still operates many satellites that have been put into orbit toward the end of the Soviet Union or just after its break-up. Russia relies on these "eyes and ears" in the sky for its security. Nowhere is that more relevant than on the huge open spaces of Siberia and the Far East -- the massive territory east of the Ural mountains. Russia's sparse population in that region, the need to monitor the borders, and the existence of high-profile military and R&D assets in Russia's eastern territory necessitates constant surveillance and observation. The recent economic development of the region -- oil and natural gas exploration and the importance Moscow now attaches to such industries -- makes it ever more necessary to keep an eye on this expanse.

China's recent interests in the Russian Far East and the constant debate about Chinese cross-border immigration to that region add to the importance of constant observation of vast open spaces that hold huge quantities of much-coveted natural resources. If Moscow's ability to observe and monitor even a part of that region were to be degraded to any degree, it would be at a disadvantage in its ability to see what takes place on the ground. Lack of roads and railroads and degraded infrastructure already make any official Russian response to a military or a humanitarian emergency there difficult. If Moscow went "blind" suddenly in huge portions of its eastern territories, there is no sure way to predict its response.

Second, and perhaps more important, is Russia's realization that there is now one less advantage it holds over China. When the Soviet Union fell apart in 1991, Russia inherited a huge arsenal of state-of-the-art weaponry and manufacturing capabilities, practically on par with the United States. At the time, China had only begun its crash program to upgrade its military, which was still armed according to 1960s and 1970s standards. Since that time, the overall state of the Russian military has eroded, notwithstanding some of its weapon development programs. Its best creations are not fielded in proper quantities in its military services. Such key assets as the Su-37, the MiG Multirole Front-Line Fighter, Ka-50, Ka-52 and Mi-28 helicopters, T-90 battle tanks, as well as armored vehicles, on board electronics and computer systems are fielded in very small quantities with few select services, or still exist as manufacture-ready prototypes that need to be put in production.

Notwithstanding Russia's robust global weapons trade, much of what it sells dates to the late 1980s, just before the end of the Cold War. Its latest developments that can match the best of the West still await proper funding and oversight. China's military is still behind Russia's in many respects, but it is catching up. One area where Russia has been able to maintain a lead over China has been in its ballistic forces. Now, with China's recent test, the gap has narrowed even further. Beijing has joined an elite, high-tech club consisting only of the United States and Russia.

Furthermore, while Russia is happy to sell military hardware to China, there is a clear line that Moscow will not cross with its neighbor. Moscow's military leadership stated on a number of occasions that Russia will not supply its latest high-tech weapons to China for security reasons, even if the price is right. There is a growing level of discomfort in Moscow with China's rapid ascent. Now, China can potentially threaten one Russian asset that still gives it enormous strength and confidence -- its space-based assets.

Despite the recent improvement in relations between Russia and China, the Kremlin is getting both apprehensive and uncomfortable with its growing role as a staple supplier to China's growing economic miracle. Ballistic and space-based technology was, until this week, one area where Russia still felt like a superpower when compared to China. That crucial advantage has now been eroded significantly.

It is prudent to watch Moscow's political and military reaction to China's test since Beijing's actions have narrowed an ever-closing gap between the two neighbors, raising new questions about the future and progress of Sino-Russian relations. The time when China can overtake Russia militarily is approaching. It has already done so economically, and is steadily gaining on Russia politically with its powerful diplomatic drive buttressed with trade incentives. How Russia will react to China's continued drive for high-tech military dominance will have a powerful and lasting effect on the future of international relations.

------------------------------


The Power and Interest News Report (PINR) is an independent organization that utilizes open source intelligence to provide conflict analysis services in the context of international relations. PINR approaches a subject based upon the powers and interests involved, leaving the moral judgments to the reader. This report may not be reproduced, reprinted or broadcast without the written permission of [email protected]. All comments should be directed to [email protected].
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
For those self style "Space expert" Read this from prestigious Wall Street Journal Here what Fisher said about the test

The result, as demonstrated by the Jan. 11 test, is a remarkable technical achievement. "There are a lot of parts to an anti-satellite kill," explains Richard Fisher of the Alexandria-based International Assessment and Strategy Center. "You have to track your target precisely. Lofting a kill vehicle and making it arrive at a very specific location at a very high rate of speed is also a tremendous technological problem. . . . This is an ASAT capability that considerably exceeds our own."

For the rest of the article read WSJ

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Courtesy of J Yan from CDF
 

Schumacher

Senior Member
You have no idea about what you talk about, they're totally different things.

Using a sat to destroy a sat is not particular hard thing, you just need to co-orbit them to close enough, timing is not too imortant here. But a direct hit, esp the head-on is a darn hard thing to do.

A sat at 850km orbit goes at the speed 7.4km/s to the ground, if the hit is head-on, you can add whatever the speed youself, which is > 10km/s as for reletive speed. Here processing power is ctrical, imaging sensor is critical, control timing is critical, control thrust is critical.... everything.

It's one of the most difficult engineering challenge.

It was clear from early on the guy was more keen on making trouble than making a sound technical observation when he persisted in using the term 'easy' to describe the test.
I think one of the key questions now is if this test say anything abt PLA's ABM capability.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top