Just An Excuse?


Methinks this looks like just an excuse for the US to test space weapons:

The Pentagon plans to shoot down a disabled 5,000-pound spy satellite before it enters the atmosphere in early March, a senior Pentagon official said Thursday.

The official said the operation was expected to be carried out from a Navy cruiser that would fire a missile specially fitted for the mission. Other details on the timing and location of the operation were not available, pending a Thursday afternoon briefing at the Defense Department. Navy ships routinely carry missiles to shoot down aircraft.

I could be wrong, but in light of the Chinese shooting down of a satellite it wouldn't surprise me that the armed forces would take advantage of this satellite's degraded orbit to send a message of their own. Let me add, I wouldn't have a problem with it, either. I'm not interested in giving up our advantage in space just yet.


Sean Paul Kelley February 14, 2008 - 4:43pm
( categories: USA: Armed Forces )

I just posted this in the newswire, you beat me by a minute! I'll remove mine

Tina February 14, 2008 - 4:54pm

we should outsource the kill to them

Tina February 14, 2008 - 5:17pm

Blowing it up in orbit is more accurate. But that will create a huge amount of orbital space junk, something the Chinese were criticized for. Since we have all this starwars technology, why not put it to a real test and actually try to shoot the thing down in the atmosphere upon re-entry?


“I despise ideologues masquerading as objective journalists.” - Bill O'Reilly, March 30, 2007

Mark February 14, 2008 - 5:21pm

first talked about the satellite I remember them saying that it would fall over the Americas and not out to sea like most of the others. I imagine they want to avoid that and want to blow it up before it hits reentry.

Tina February 14, 2008 - 6:27pm

for future wandering meteorites.

adrena February 15, 2008 - 3:43pm

And perhaps made tongue in cheek, but that *is* one aspect of human space capability that I'd concede to be agreeable. [*koff*]

But I can't help wondering what such subsequent debris would do to orbiting sats.

Zuma February 15, 2008 - 4:04pm

wondering too after reading the comments at ACW. People seem concerned about possible damage to the space station. I don't know how probable that would be, the details make my eyes glaze over.

Tina February 15, 2008 - 4:13pm

We have zero space capacity. Whatever advantage is there is the U.S. government's. 180 degree difference. I hold it unwise to rely on anything they put up, not cel phones or GPS or Sirius radio or Satellite television or internet connectivity or anything. Furthermore, programs like the dyna-glide and space marines bode extreme ill for anyone who disagrees with the U.S. government. Anyone, anywhere. Bad as things are now, for us, imagine the future. The 'privatization' of NASA and space is to me anything but that, it's big government under another name sans checks and balance. Mussolini times 1,000, and so on. No one is free to not submit completely to the company. A digression, but first things first.

This post's subject merely brought this post to mind:
KH-13: Summarily Disposed?
I'd always wanted to know more the rival military faction, bur never heard more. Perhaps it had something to do with issues surrounding this missile's development. Certainly Russia is somewhat a strong incentive to 'our' military to maintain cohesion, while albeit the U.S. government itself gives them cause to pause. Ironically. Now, China as well. (Thank you, President Clinton, for helping them down the road 10 years ago. For what? Two million dollars?)

Methinks you think aright, alright. Not wrong at all.
But I don't think any of it bodes well.

Zuma February 14, 2008 - 5:32pm

by Bob Dylan...

In a recent LiveJournal post on Infragard, I linked to Dylan's site's 'License To Kill' lyrics page. I'd noted in his song's commentary on our hubris, our sense of entitlement to kill, the line; '...first step was touching the moon...' and that I'm sympathetic to that sentiment.

Tha's all.

Zuma February 15, 2008 - 4:09pm

What's this? Doesn't this "special" missile violate the ABM treaty? What's going on?

Chickadee February 14, 2008 - 5:54pm

...in June 2002. All the stuff up in Alaska would also have violated the ABM Treaty.

Near as I can tell they want to take out this vehicle for obvious reasons - it's an advanced platform that they don't want anyone exploiting the debris from. Usually they deorbit these things somewhere really deep, but given that they have basically zero control over it, they have to shoot it down to try and make sure that none of the debris can be exploited. My guess is that if they wait long enough, and shoot from a position of favourable geometry, pretty much all of stuff will re-enter and burn up quite quickly (i.e., it won't cause a big spray of enduring space junk like the Chinese intercept did).

"A survey data set containing imputed values should not be analyzed uncritically as if all the data were real values." ~ Graham Kalton

JustPlainDave February 14, 2008 - 6:23pm

Just killing three birds with one stone: showing the Chinese we can blow up their satellites real good, making sure there isn't enough left after re-entry to give away trade secrets, and there probably is a slight but genuine concern about letting it burn up naturally. The "fuel" thing seems to be bogus. If it still had fuel left to burn, why would it be de-orbiting?

zot23 February 14, 2008 - 7:44pm

Specialists who follow spy satellite operations have speculated that the problem satellite is an experimental imagery device built by Lockheed Martin and launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California aboard a Delta II rocket. Shortly after it reached orbit, ground controllers lost the ability to control it and were unable to regain communication.

“Not necessarily dead, but deaf,” as Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian center for Astrophysics, put it in late January.


"Frankly, we've lost a lot in recent years." - General Colin Powell

Raja February 14, 2008 - 7:47pm

Isn't the real danger here that they will attempt to explode the satellite in orbit and fail, proving once again that American technological superiority is on the decline?

"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
The only proof he needed for the existence of God was music."
-Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country

jumpinin February 14, 2008 - 8:49pm

They'll just come up with some story about why, after all, it was not a good idea to do it.

creativelcro February 15, 2008 - 2:57am

I've been wondering why this story has had such a greasy feel to it - aside from the usual greasy felling I get whenever BushCo does anything. Anyway, there is definitely an element of desperation to it. Almost like they need to cover something up. Hmmm.

EvilleMike
Don't confuse my willingness to accommodate with your own need for me to obey.

EvilleMike February 15, 2008 - 10:45am

...follow-up shots if the first misses. I would guess that the cumulative pK of multiple shots on something with such well known orbital characteristics (and lacking countermeasures, etc.) is very high.

"A survey data set containing imputed values should not be analyzed uncritically as if all the data were real values." ~ Graham Kalton

JustPlainDave February 15, 2008 - 12:04pm

I dunno. But at first glance it doesn't seem that calc'ing the trajectory of a scud or similar is all that hard now-a-days. We have 'puters and stuff, after all. Perhaps its more difficult to launch, control and hit something precisely than it is to know precisely were something is headed.

ww February 15, 2008 - 1:51pm

...it's because of the long period of observation - with a satellite unless some external force not taken into account by the model operates on the vehicle, an observer should be able to determine where it will be at a given instant in time, with pretty high accuracy.

That said, by far the most important factors, I think, are those you identified in your last sentence - with a long lead time one shoots at the most advantageous time. Given that the platform is seaborne, one can move to shoot from the most advantageous possible position. With an incoming missile, one has a lot less observation time - it comes into the field of view of the sensor and one has just a brief time to look at it, characterize the trajectory based on a much smaller set of data, figure out where it's going to be and find a firing solution. Chance plays a much larger role - in this situation, chance is certainly still there, but one can do a lot to stack the deck.

"A survey data set containing imputed values should not be analyzed uncritically as if all the data were real values." ~ Graham Kalton

JustPlainDave February 15, 2008 - 2:08pm

at ACW. I think it is info you, ww and others can relate too.

Tina February 15, 2008 - 2:15pm

...haven't they? I checked after your initial post, but this is so much more. It's the Giant Lego Warehouse redux.

I can relate to the info - but dunno that I can understand it!

"A survey data set containing imputed values should not be analyzed uncritically as if all the data were real values." ~ Graham Kalton

JustPlainDave February 15, 2008 - 2:32pm

links at ACW


The Shot

posted Thursday February 14, 2008 under outer-space by jeffrey

That’s what Ambassador James Jeffrey’s called the decision to use an an Aegis SM-3 to try to shoot down USA 193 in the next 3-12 days. (Transcript should be posted here ; video at the Pentagon Channel.)

Holding the aside the politics of this — which are terrible — the briefing on debris risk left me cold. I have to say that I am very, very uneasy about this decision — our missile defense tests have been heavily scripted to minimize debris creation and modeling of debris creation isn’t an exact science.

The burden of proof really should be on these guys to demonstrate that the risks to the ISS and other objects in space are minimal.

General Carwright, to his credit, provided enough technical information to model the intercept. David Wright is working on that right now — for those of you who can’t wait, the important numbers are:

1. The intercept will occur at 240 kilometers (130 nautical miles)
2. The mass of the satellite is 2,300 kg (5,000 pounds)
3. The mass of the interceptor is 20 kg. (From CBO)
4. The closing velocity will be 9.8 km/s (22,000 mph), suggesting a virtually head-on collision.

Other pertinent observations. At 240 km, the satellite should be traveling 7.8 km/s; the SM-3 has a burnout velocity of 3 km/s.

I am very worried about the debris creation — particularly the debris that the light-weight interceptor will kick into higher orbits when it hits the massive (bus-sized) satellite. Thnk, as Geoff Forden suggested, of a ping pong ball hitting a superball.

Virtually all the debris should come down quickly. Cartwright said 50 percent would come down within two orbits, with the rest coming down in weeks and months. That seems plausible, at first blush.

But those two orbits could be hairy and some of the debris will remain in orbit. Michael Griffin, NASA Administrator, said there are “good times and bad times” to conduct the intercept, based on the position of the ISS but that “bad times are not all that bad” comparing the risk to an order of magnitude lower than flying the shuttle.

Last I checked, the PRAN for the shuttle was 1 in 100. Extrapolating, there would be only a 1 in 1000 chance of wiping out the ISS.

Great.

Anyway, we should be able to get some real numbers in the next 24 hours.

Tina February 14, 2008 - 9:20pm

:)

Tina February 14, 2008 - 9:40pm
Tina February 14, 2008 - 9:21pm

Does it carry any radioactive materials?

And if the answer is "no", is that a lie?


"The best-informed man is not necessarily the wisest. Indeed there is a danger that precisely in the multiplicity of his knowledge he will lose sight of what is essential."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Escher Sketch February 14, 2008 - 10:08pm

Wiki says no ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_193#Hazardous_materials_and_destruction_plans

... but it's a classified sat, so we probably won't know unless there is a leak.

tfisb February 15, 2008 - 1:41am

...power source, given the history of American use of these power sources and the nature of the sat. The imaging of the vehicle shows no solar array deployed - apparently there was telemetry from the vehicle for a brief period (measured in a fairly large number of days, IIRC) suggesting that the vehicle initially had battery power, but being unable to deploy the solar array for some reason, ran out of juice and flat lined.

"A survey data set containing imputed values should not be analyzed uncritically as if all the data were real values." ~ Graham Kalton

JustPlainDave February 15, 2008 - 12:02pm

The entire world yelled at China for their ridiculously unnecessary test. Wouldn't we attract the same sort of ill will if we tried it? Shouldn't we be banning weapons in space instead of waving our massive national penis around?

Seems that now is the time to do it: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/13/world/europe/13arms.html

Lord Omlette February 15, 2008 - 12:39am

...ships equipped to fire the SM3 is the USS Port Royal. Of the recent small boats in the Persian Gulf fame. Let's see what entertaining stories can be spun around that. ;)

"A survey data set containing imputed values should not be analyzed uncritically as if all the data were real values." ~ Graham Kalton

JustPlainDave February 15, 2008 - 1:14am

A guy on the International Space Station said that all the stuff coming inside the airlock smells kind of metallic/welding, in a pleasant way. He concluded it was the smell of space. However wouldn't it more likely mostly be metal microparticles created by stupid shit like the boys playing with their big ray gun (or better yet bottle rockets)?

link: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/station/crew/exp6/spacechronicles4.html
nerds: http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/13/1418216
--
Hongpong.com

HongPong February 15, 2008 - 2:10am

messes up some olfactory receptors...

creativelcro February 15, 2008 - 3:00am

If the missle has enough delta-v to reach orbit (to go after that spy satellite)....what if it missed?
Would it simply fall back to earth? If not, might it pose a danget to the Space Station (if it happened to have sufficient energy to make it that high)?

Wouldn't it be just Bush's luck that the might get to take down Clinton's space station.....(yeah, oversimplifying, but Clinton was the Pres that starting putting the stuff up, I think....)

-5.75,-4.05
"We're all fucked. It helps to remember that." --George Carlin

justadood February 15, 2008 - 4:01am

Every spy movie I've ever seen shows the fancy gizmo with a big red self-destruct button. What happened? Who forgot it? Is this what happens when you low-bid an NRO satellite?

Really- can't they pack some heat-based explosives in the sucker shaped to blow up the naughty bits? They must have the best boom-boom goop on the planet.

“The Playboy reader invites a female acquaintance in for a quiet discussion of Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex.” - Hugh Hefner

Tonsure Wimple February 15, 2008 - 4:35am

...device on something that you put into space, particularly something that has a price tag in the billions and is strategically significant, is that there's no certain guarantee that someone else won't push the big red button at an inconvenient time. One of the things that folks are spending a non-zero amount of time on is trying to make sure that non-friendly folks can't somehow take control of or otherwise exploit assets like this in orbit - I tend to think they wouldn't want to hand someone such a potential and that's quite apart from simple accidents. A complete failure like this, where they don't have even enough control to fire the thrusters and de-orbit the vehicle is pretty damned rare, if not without precedent - the risks of not wiring it for destruct seem to me to be a lot less than the risks of doing so.

"A survey data set containing imputed values should not be analyzed uncritically as if all the data were real values." ~ Graham Kalton

JustPlainDave February 15, 2008 - 9:46am

Ever seen Wargames? Some kid in Washington state pressing the 'red button' from his laptop in his parent's basement is a horror scenario to these folks. Even worse would be a targetted attack by a national enemy (let's say China) were they gather these passwords for months/years and then detonate ALL your important satellites on the eve of some sort of invasion. Catastrophic blackout.

zot23 February 15, 2008 - 2:18pm

U.S. vows to pay for damage caused by satellite

By Stephanie Nebehay

GENEVA (Reuters) - The United States pledged on Friday to compensate countries if debris lands on their territory from a dying U.S. spy satellite that the Pentagon plans to shoot down.

Ambassador Christina Rocca said that if efforts fail to strike the satellite with a missile while it is still in space, it was expected to make an "uncontrolled re-entry into the earth's atmosphere on or about March 6".

The satellite is carrying more than 1,000 pounds (454 kg) of hydrazine fuel, and could release much of it as a toxic gas, according to Deputy U.S. National Security Adviser James Jeffrey.

"Whether the engagement succeeds or fails, the U.S. is prepared to offer assistance to governments to mitigate the consequences of any satellite debris impacts on their territory," Rocca told the Conference on Disarmament.

This was in keeping with a 1972 treaty on international liability for damage caused by space objects, which the United States has ratified, she said.

U.S. officials said on Thursday that President George W. Bush had decided to have the Navy shoot the 5,000-pound (2,270 kg) satellite with a modified tactical missile after security advisers suggested its re-entry could lead to a loss of life.

Rocca told the 65-member state forum that the timing of the strike would be chosen to "maximize the chance of hitting the fuel tank and to ensure that the resulting debris will re-enter quickly and thus not pose a danger to satellites and peaceful space operations".

Washington would seek to minimize the chances that any debris re-entering the atmosphere could hit a populated area.

Tina February 15, 2008 - 3:15pm

also see round up from Raw Story

Russia worried by errant US satellite: news agencies
15 February 2008 | 22:18 | FOCUS News Agency

AFP
Moscow. Russia is carefully tracking a crippled US spy satellite that Washington plans to destroy in the coming days, and agrees it could pose a threat if it crashed to Earth, a defence ministry official said Friday, AFP informs.

"He's not bluffing when he talks about the danger posed by this satellite," the unnamed Russian official told Interfax and RIA Novosti news agencies, referring to comments made Thursday by General James Cartwright, vice chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The United States says the satellite is the size of a bus and contains a large quantity of hydrazine, an extremely toxic propellant.

The chemical could be dangerous to people on the ground if the satellite -- currently in Earth orbit but being pulled down by Earth's gravity -- does not burn up on re-entry, it says.

Washington says a US warship will fire a surface-to-air missile at the satellite at a specific point in its orbit that ensures any Earthbound debris will splash into the ocean.

It denies the shoot down aims at protecting the satellite's technological secrets or at demonstrating US anti-satellite capability.

A senior Russian parliamentarian echoed the defence ministry's concerns.

"The trajectory of the satellite's descent is unclear, but there is every likelihood it could fall on Russian territory," the deputy head of parliament's defence committee, Igor Barinov, told Interfax.

But Barinov also said he hoped Washington was not trying to flex its military muscles.

"If this is the Americans' answer to China's latest action in shooting down its faulty weather satellite, and if such a decision is aimed at demonstrating American power, then it could lead to a new escalation in the military sphere," he warned.

AFP


Russia tracks rogue U.S. satellite, contains nuclear material
15:23 | 15/ 02/ 2008

Print version

MOSCOW, February 15 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's Defense Ministry is closely monitoring a U.S. spy satellite that has gone out of control and may have nuclear material on board, a high-ranking defense source said on Friday.

"The Defense Ministry is using its space surveillance systems to track the satellite's movement in orbit," he said.

Russian military experts suggest the satellite could have an on board nuclear power source, a senior parliament member said.

Igor Barinov, first deputy chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee, also expressed concern that the U.S. had made a unilateral decision to destroy the satellite.

He said that decisions, which could jeopardize collective security, "should be made taking into account all parties concerned and all countries involved in space research."

The U.S. Defense Department said Thursday it would shoot down the decaying satellite, which it earlier considered to be low risk. The department said the chances that the "uncontrollable U.S. experimental satellite" will hit a populated area are small, but "the potential consequences would be of enough concern to consider mitigating actions."

The satellite was launched in 2006 and malfunctioned almost immediately. On board is around 1,000 pounds of propellant fuel (hydrazine), a hazardous material.

President George W Bush has authorized the destruction of the satellite using a sea-to-air missile within the next few days.

Earlier the director of the Henry L. Stimson Center, which monitors space security and research Michael Krepon, said that the reasons given for shooting down the satellite were "unpersuasive," adding previous satellites that had gone out of control had not caused any damage.

"The president has decided to take action to mitigate the risk to human lives by engaging the nonfunctioning satellite," the Defense Department explained in a news announcement. "Because our missile defense system is not designed to engage satellites, extraordinary measures have been taken to temporarily modify three sea-based tactical missiles and three ships to carry out the engagement."

Several government agencies are involved in monitoring and planning for re-entry of the satellite.

Tina February 15, 2008 - 6:34pm

It would not have to be a remote-controlled Big Shiny Red Button. I was thinking more something would go off when the thing takes The Big Dive and overheats. Just enough to rip it apart into parts small enough to burn up on re-entry.

“The Playboy reader invites a female acquaintance in for a quiet discussion of Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex.” - Hugh Hefner

Tonsure Wimple February 16, 2008 - 4:09am

Satellite Shootdown Could Be Wednesday

* Tuesday February 19 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Pentagon says the military's attempt to shot down a wayward U.S. spy satellite as it falls toward Earth could happen as early as Wednesday night, but no final decision on timing has been made.

Press secretary Geoff Morrell said Tuesday that senior military officers, including the head of the U.S. Strategic Command, are evaluating the situation and will advise Defense Secretary Robert Gates when is the best time to carry it out.

The plan is to fire a missile that would release a ``kenetic kill vehicle,'' - a non-explosive device - on a path that would enable it to collide with the satellite, destroying the spacecraft and its components by force of impact alone.

Tina February 19, 2008 - 6:23pm

US to try satellite shoot-down on Thursday
Posted: 19 February 2008 0922 hrs

AFP
WASHINGTON : The United States will take its first shot at an out-of-control spy satellite on Thursday, trying to knock it into the sea before it crashes to Earth, possibly causing damage, CNN news reported Monday.

A second attempt would be possible if the first misses, the channel said, citing military sources. Pentagon officials were not immediately available for confirmation.

Without intervention, the crippled satellite is due to break into the Earth's atmosphere on March 6 and crash down at an unpredictable spot, risking rupturing its tanks of toxic fuel, US authorities warned last week.

A US warship will fire a surface-to-air missile at the satellite at a specific point in its orbit that ensures any Earth-bound debris will splash into the ocean.

The shoot-down plan drew criticism on Sunday from Russia, whose defence ministry said in a statement it looked like a veiled weapons test and an "attempt to move the arms race into space."

Washington has denied seeking to cover up the satellite's technological secrets or to make a show of strength after China used a missile to shoot down an old weather satellite in January 2007. - AFP/ch

Tina February 19, 2008 - 6:39pm

USA 193 imminent decay in the news (rewritten16/02; updated twice 19/02)
UPDATE 19/02/08: John Locker has drawn attention to a second NOTAM for the same area, one day later. This is probably for a possible second attempt if the first one fails.

http://sattrackcam.blogspot.com/2008/01/usa-193-imminent-decay-in-news.html

Tina February 20, 2008 - 2:58am

... they will fire multiple rockets. From my reading. Sorry, no linky.

ww February 20, 2008 - 11:43am

US warships position for satellite shoot down
AFP
Published: Tuesday February 19, 2008

A US warship is moving into position to try to shoot down an out-of-control US spy satellite as early as Wednesday before it tumbles into the Earth's atmosphere, Pentagon officials said Tuesday.

Armed with two specially modified interceptor missiles, the USS Lake Erie has been tasked to intercept the satellite over the Pacific and shoot it down into the ocean, the officials said, adding that a cruiser, the Aegis, is already in waters off Hawaii.

The USS Decatur, a guided missile destroyer, is carrying a third interceptor missile in case the first two attempts fail, defense officials said. Another destroyer, the USS Russell, was still in port on Tuesday.

"I'm confident they'll be able to do something," said a senior Navy official. "Once the weapon goes into track, then I think it's a done deal."

The Pentagon has waited for the space shuttle Atlantis to land first at the end of its mission to the International Space Station. That is scheduled for 9:07 am Wednesday.

"Touchdown of the Atlantis opens the window of opportunity for the US military to shoot down that rapidly decaying US intelligence satellite," said Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary.

"There is a very low risk because our orbits are quite different," Atlantis Commander Steve Frick said. "The satellite is well below us (where) we are now, but of course we are going to land before they break up that satellite."

The Pentagon is essentially employing the US missile defense system for the shoot-down attempt at an estimated cost of 40 to 60 million dollars.

It is training a panoply of Aegis warships, radars and computerized command networks on the school bus-sized satellite.

Software changes have been made to the SM-3 interceptor missiles so that they will recognize a satellite in space instead of a ballistic missile -- their normal programmed target -- officials said.

The three-stage missile will carry a maneuverable non-explosive warhead guided from the ground until it can use its infrared sensor to steer itself into a shattering collision with the satellite at an altitude of 150 nautical miles.

US Navy ships have intercepted ballistic missile warheads in this way in tests, but the Navy official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity, said the satellite poses a somewhat different problem.

It is colder and moving through space at a much higher speed, making it more difficult to track than the ballistic missiles.

If the USS Lake Erie misses with its first shot, it will probably have to wait a day to try again. The longer the wait, the harder the satellite will be to shoot down as it gathers speed, falling towards the Earth's atmosphere.

The plan is to hit a tank on the satellite carrying the toxic propellant hydrazine, which officials say could pose a threat to humans if it survives re-entry.

"The system itself is very accurate so hopefully that will translate into being able to hit the tank," said a defense official.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who leaves Wednesday on a trip to Australia and Southeast Asia, has been empowered President George W. Bush to authorize the shoot-down, Morrell said.

"Based on the advice he gets he's prepared to do so from the road if necessary," he said.

France urged the United States to take all necessary safety measures.

"We hope all measures will be taken to reduce as much as possible the consequences of destroying this satellite for the safety and integrity of other space objects," foreign ministry spokeswoman Pascale Andreani told reporters.

The plan drew criticism on Sunday from Russia, whose defense ministry said it looked like a veiled weapons test and an "attempt to move the arms race into space." China has also voiced concern.

Washington has denied seeking to cover up the satellite's technological secrets or to make a show of strength after China used a missile to shoot down an old weather satellite in January 2007.

Tina February 20, 2008 - 3:08pm

Atlantis shuttle returns to Earth

BBC
The Atlantis orbiter has touched down on Earth after a 13-day mission to cement Europe's position on the International Space Station (ISS).

The spacecraft and its crew installed the 12.8-tonne Columbus science lab, an achievement that makes Europe a full member of the $100bn platform project.

Atlantis landed at Florida's Kennedy Space Center at 1407 GMT.

Now that the shuttle is down, the US military will be allowed to shoot an ailing spy satellite out of the sky.

more

Tina February 20, 2008 - 1:43pm

*crickets* even at ACW

Tina February 29, 2008 - 9:28pm

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.