China tests ASAT

EM shielding isn't hard. It is already widely applied, infact, every single satellites up there are already EM shielded, or how else do you think they would work??

EM resistant electronics are widely avaliable, even constructing a simple Faraday cage (A good metal casing) can do the trick.

Hendrik_2000 said:

Don't give me concept weapon they are dime a dozen! They come and go and most of them never see the light of the day Show me an operational direct ascent weapon that can shoot Satellite in the range of 600 km

Click to expand...

Try Kamikaze Space shuttle. It is operational, and it garantee to work !!

Pity america has only 3 left.

Schumacher said:

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.

Click to expand...

You have no right to say that Schumacher. And I resent your assertions. You are making a totally uneducated assessment. I work in the satellite field. I have been on three contracted programs and currently work for a private interest now as a consultant. I have been on 15 launch teams. I have worked Attitude and Orbit Control subsystems for the last 8 years. I know we can put a launch vehicle within 1 meter of dilution threshhold. How do I know? Because I've been a part of a team that's actually done it. Satellite orbits are relatively stable and very predictable. If it's not maneuvering on it's orbital track, it wouldn't be overly difficult at all to put a vehicle at a nominal altitude, on a nominal course at an exact time to hit it. This accuracy is demonstrated monthly in commercial space applications. I'm not knocking China here. I don't know why you insist on that in every thread I partake. It's childish. I've already admitted that I was wrong in my first assumption. Also I'm saying that it's not very surprising they would be able to accomplish this at some point. If you understand attitude control algorithms, have good quality control, and can design a launch vehicle and payload to a high degree of tolerance there's no reason why this presents extreme difficulties. Perhaps you can say their quality control methods in this area have matured to a high caliber. The USA and Russia both have been able to do this for a long time. It's not magic. I knew China would field such capabilities at some point. What I didn't see coming though was they would apply it to ASAT. The fact is there is alot of similarities into the principles applied to accurately launching a satellite as there is into this particular ASAT test. The only real difference is the endgame.

dioditto, unless you have a degree in a relevant engineering field or are working towards one, stop talking.

Hi Sea Dog,

I was right. I was probing in my previous post to you and it turns out you do have some knowledge about satellites and orbittal motion.

You post:
If it's not manoeuvering on it's orbital track, it wouldn't be overly difficult at all to put a vehicle at a nominal altitude, on a nominal course at an exact time to hit it. This accuracy is demonstrated monthly in commercial space applications.

Here's my question:I agree with what you said above. It is simply newtonion rudimetry physics. But firing a missile to kill a satellite is slightly different isnt it. The intention is not really to co-orbit, and also the head on speed (relative to each other) is much faster allowing much much less margin for error.

Hence the guidance systems would have to be a little more sophisticated than used in what you just described above.

Having said all this, it would just be a matter of time before the US come up with something similar, and the Chinese then trying to better it, and so on and so forth.



Michael

I have little doubt about Sea Dog's claim that he works in space industry. His statement contains the clear mistakes:

"I know we can put a launch vehicle within 1 meter of dilution threshhold."

This is damn wrong. Today's sat orbit precision control is measured in "km", not "m", let alone "1 meter". A few km of error is quite normal and nobody can achieve a meter's precision, although tracking is well under 1m threadhold.

"The USA and Russia both have been able to do this for a long time."

What "this" means? 1 meter precision for orbit control? None of them can achieve that in a open loop orbit control way. If you can do that in the open loop control, you don't need any homing device on the KV, the ground can control everything then, but it's not the reality.

"This accuracy is demonstrated monthly in commercial space applications."

Also it's wrong. No commercial space sat can achieve 1 meter's orbit precision at this time.

If sats orbits are only known in the km accuracy, how can systems meassure their position on the earth in the below one meter range while relying on signals sent from sats and comparing their runtimes? I'm reffering to GPS and such ...
And why can sats outfitted with radar or laser meassure wave highs or the growth of mountains due to continental drifts in the cm range?

Scratch said:

If sats orbits are only known in the km accuracy, how can systems meassure their position on the earth in the below one meter range while relying on signals sent from sats and comparing their runtimes? I'm reffering to GPS and such ...
And why can sats outfitted with radar or laser meassure wave highs or the growth of mountains due to continental drifts in the cm range?

Click to expand...

The tracking can be done in cm level, not the control(positioning), two concepts.

GPS wroks in the way not depending on the precision of their orbit control, but on the precision of their orbit measuring(tracking).

dioditto said:

EM shielding isn't hard. It is already widely applied, infact, every single satellites up there are already EM shielded, or how else do you think they would work??

EM resistant electronics are widely avaliable, even constructing a simple Faraday cage (A good metal casing) can do the trick.

Click to expand...

If the magnetic field needed to accelerate is very high, it can induce funny phase transition/separation in many materials. That can definitely make the electronic device malfunction. Not the weak fields induced by electromagnetic waves.

Last chance boys. Last chance. Any more insults or trolling(baiting) for trouble and I will issue warnings and close this thread.:nono: :nono:

bd popeye super moderator