Chinese Demonstrate Ability to Destroy Satellites, Is it Time to Destroy China Yet? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

host · 01-19-2007, 10:23 AM

....and which side will Wal-Mart be on? I've posted extensively on the inevitably of war with China. Our elected officials provoked China to answer with this stunt. IMO, we will attack China when they have many more than the 25 nuclear weaponized ICBM's that they currently are estimated to have deployed, and when the US reaches the point where it's currency is so weakened in purchasing power that military readiness is dramatically compromised.

Russia is just now embarking on a nuclear weapons modernization program. The US is, compared to these military and hegemonic competitors, at it's zenith....there will probably never be a better opportunity to dictate, through sheer intimidation, a demand by the US for unconditional global nuclear disarmament, followed by confiscation of all such foreign weapons and weapons programs, and then by permanent US/UN weapons inspection programs in all other countries.

I am no hawk. I am a realist motivated only by resignation to the inevitability that the US government, sooner than we can comprehend, will desperately lash out militarily at a then much stronger Russia and China, in a last ditch attempt to leverage US investment in military superiority to avoid or postpone the spectacle of US military capability, rusting out at the dock, after a series of currency "degredation events", make it impossible to maintain and operate.

Quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/19/wo...erland&emc=rss
January 19, 2007
Flexing Muscle, China Destroys Satellite in Test
By WILLIAM J. BROAD and DAVID E. SANGER

China successfully carried out its first test of an antisatellite weapon last week, signaling its resolve to play a major role in military space activities and bringing expressions of concern from Washington and other capitals, the Bush administration said yesterday.

Only two nations — the Soviet Union and the United States — have previously destroyed spacecraft in antisatellite tests, most recently the United States in the mid-1980s.

Arms control experts called the test, in which the weapon destroyed an aging Chinese weather satellite, a troubling development that could foreshadow an antisatellite arms race. Alternatively, however, some experts speculated that it could precede a diplomatic effort by China to prod the Bush administration into negotiations on a weapons ban.

“This is the first real escalation in the weaponization of space that we’ve seen in 20 years,” said Jonathan McDowell, a Harvard astronomer who tracks rocket launchings and space activity. “It ends a long period of restraint.”

White House officials said the United States and other nations, which they did not identify, had “expressed our concern regarding this action to the Chinese.” Despite its protest, the Bush administration has long resisted a global treaty banning such tests because it says it needs freedom of action in space.

Jianhua Li, a spokesman at the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said that he had heard about the antisatellite story but that he had no statement or information.

At a time when China is modernizing its nuclear weapons, expanding the reach of its navy and sending astronauts into orbit for the first time, the test appears to mark a new sphere of technical and military competition. American officials complained yesterday that China had made no public or private announcements about its test, despite repeated requests by American officials for more openness about its actions.

The weather satellite hit by the weapon had circled the globe at an altitude of roughly 500 miles. In theory, the test means that China can now hit American spy satellites, which orbit closer to Earth. The satellites presumably in range of the Chinese missile include most of the imagery satellites used for basic military reconnaissance, which are essentially the eyes of the American intelligence community for military movements, potential nuclear tests and even some counterterrorism, and commercial satellites.

Experts said the weather satellite’s speeding remnants could pose a threat to other satellites for years or even decades.

In late August, President Bush authorized a new national space policy that ignored calls for a global prohibition on such tests. The policy said the United States would “preserve its rights, capabilities, and freedom of action in space” and “dissuade or deter others from either impeding those rights or developing capabilities intended to do so.” It declared the United States would “deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to U.S. national interests.”

The Chinese test “could be a shot across the bow,” said Theresa Hitchens, director of the Center for Defense Information, a private group in Washington that tracks military programs. “For several years, the Russians and Chinese have been trying to push a treaty to ban space weapons. The concept of exhibiting a hard-power capability to bring somebody to the negotiating table is a classic cold war technique.”

Gary Samore, the director of studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, said in an interview: “I think it makes perfect sense for the Chinese to do this both for deterrence and to hedge their bets. It puts pressure on the U.S. to negotiate agreements not to weaponize space.”

Ms. Hitchens and other critics have accused the administration of conducting secret research on advanced antisatellite weapons using lasers, which are considered a far speedier and more powerful way of destroying satellites than the weapons of two decades ago.

The White House statement, issued by the National Security Council, said China’s “development and testing of such weapons is inconsistent with the spirit of cooperation that both countries aspire to in the civil space area.”

An administration official who had reviewed the intelligence about China’s test said the launching was detected by the United States in the early evening of Jan. 11, which would have been early morning on Jan. 12 in China. American satellites tracked the launching of the medium-range ballistic missile, and later space radars saw the debris.

The antisatellite test was first reported late Wednesday on the Web site of Aviation Week and Space Technology, an industry magazine. It said intelligence agencies had yet to “complete confirmation of the test.”

The test, the magazine said, appeared to employ a ground-based interceptor that used the sheer force of impact rather than an exploding warhead to shatter the satellite.

Dr. McDowell of Harvard said the satellite was known as Feng Yun, or “wind and cloud.” Launched in 1999, it was the third in a series. He said that it was a cube measuring 4.6 feet on each side, and that its solar panels extended about 28 feet. He added that it was due for retirement but that it still appeared to be electronically alive, making it an ideal target.

“If it stops working,” he said, “you know you have a successful hit.”

David C. Wright, a senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a private group in Cambridge, Mass., said he calculated that the Chinese satellite had shattered into 800 fragments four inches wide or larger, and millions of smaller pieces.

The Soviet Union conducted roughly a dozen antisatellite tests from 1968 to 1982, Dr. McDowell said, adding that the Reagan administration carried out its experiments in 1985 and 1986.

The Bush administration has conducted research that critics say could produce a powerful ground-based laser weapon that would be used against enemy satellites.

The largely secret project, parts of which were made public through Air Force budget documents submitted to Congress last year, appears to be part of a wide-ranging administration effort to develop space weapons, both defensive and offensive.

The administration’s laser research is far more ambitious than a previous effort by the Clinton administration to develop an antisatellite laser, though the administration denies that it is an attempt to build a laser weapon.

The current research takes advantage of an optical technique that uses sensors, computers and flexible mirrors to counteract the atmospheric turbulence that seems to make stars twinkle. The weapon would essentially reverse that process, shooting focused beams of light upward with great clarity and force.

Michael Krepon, co-founder of the Henry L. Stimson Center, a group that studies national security, called the Chinese test very un-Chinese.

“There’s nothing subtle about this,” he said. “They’ve created a huge debris cloud that will last a quarter century or more. It’s at a higher elevation than the test we did in 1985, and for that one the last trackable debris took 17 years to clear out.”

Mr. Krepon added that the administration had long argued that the world needed no space-weapons treaty because no such arms existed and because the last tests were two decades ago. “It seems,” he said, “that argument is no longer operative.”

Willravel · 01-19-2007, 10:29 AM

Everything will happen in this order:
1) War on terror (targeting oil rich Middle Eastern countries)
2) War on drugs (this will escalate, and the US will probably have large scale military ops in Central and South America, where there juse happens to be oil)
3) War on tyrany (time to take out China and Russia)

1 and 2 will bankrupt us to a point where the dollar is nothing, and 3 will probably lead to very large attacks on US soil. This is probably how things will end for the empire, and the US will break up into smaller countries, since cerntralized power will be gone. The West coast will be a smoking hole. By then, I will be in Europe (Italy, Switzerland, Germany, who knows?) and so will the rest of my family.

I hope I'm wrong.

mixedmedia · 01-19-2007, 10:33 AM

"no two countries that both had a McDonald's had fought a war against each other, since each got its McDonald's." - Thomas Friedman

*shrug* I dunno, I kind of agree with this theory. But maybe I'm just an optimist.

The_Jazz · 01-19-2007, 10:40 AM

I'm more of a student of the Cold War than the rest of you, I guess. What have the Chinese done here that doesn't have a direct analogy with what the USSR did during the Cold War? I mean the Soviets had the following technologies before us or close enough that it didn't matter: satellites, manned space flight, hydrogen bomb, nuclear-tipped missles, sea launched nuclear weapons, mobile ICBM launchers, etc. etc.

I don't really want to see it happen, but wouldn't an arms race be beneficial in some regards, especially when it comes to Japanese economic assistance?

jorgelito · 01-19-2007, 10:41 AM

This thread really belongs in Paranoia. It's a bit early to jump the gun and hit the panic button here.

All the Chinese have demonstrated is that they can shoot down their own satellites. Something that the US and Russia have been able to do since the mid-80's. I didn't hear any threat aimed at anyone. There was no announcement that US satellites are now to be targets of Chinese missiles.

I do agree that there is a potential threat but really, it's just a witch hunt at this moment.

I do not think the Chinese want to take out anyone's satellites (it doesn't help them at all). I do think they want to be respected as a power to be reckoned with and the test serves as a reminder that they are up and coming.

There will be no "destruction" of China as that is not in the US interest (won't resolve anything). There is no profit to be made by starting a war with China (at this time as far as I can see).

More cooperation and engagement with China is better. Ultimately, our soft power will win out.

roachboy · 01-19-2007, 10:48 AM

i am not sure of the significance of this test: it seems to me mostly theater aimed at some diplomatic end, probably somehow tied in with the (presumably dormant, but who knows) bush people signal from a few years ago to pursue the reagan-era delusion called "star wars".
but maybe i too am an optimist.

i am much more concerned about what the neocons are thinking about doing relative to iran.
what appears to be happening there is curious: ahmadinejad finds himself in a very weak position politically of late, and there seems to be alot of pressure on him to back off the confrontational posture he has adopted about the nuclear program--which has more to do with the un sanctions than with american carrier-gathering in the gulf--but i wonder if the bush people would be stupid enough to do something, like launch airstrikes. if ahmadinejad's government falls, then i think the pretexts would fall with him--so the weakenss of his position at present may not be a good thing.
i would not be surprised to read something about an american strike against iran soon.
then the shit would hit the fan.
i dont want to think about it much, though.
paranoia is way too easy.

as for the future of the us, i have no idea.

powerclown · 01-19-2007, 11:11 AM

It's a lot of land America could use for theme parks, shopping malls and heavy weapons factories.

Carno · 01-19-2007, 11:20 AM

Welcome to 1985, China.

The_Jazz · 01-19-2007, 12:33 PM

One other thought - given that China now has the 3rd largest nuclear force (behind the US and Russia), why in the world would the US ever launch a first-strike campaign against them? Not only would it be suicide since the Chinese have the landbased missles and missle submarines, but it would be global suicide.

Maybe a nuclear winter is the Bush administration's way to combat global warming.

Paranoia indeed.

mixedmedia · 01-19-2007, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

It's a lot of land America could use for theme parks, shopping malls and heavy weapons factories.

haha, this reminded me of this old Randy Newman song...and he doesn't even mention China! Well, Asia...

Quote:

Political Science

No one likes us-I don't know why
We may not be perfect, but heaven knows we try
But all around, even our old friends put us down
Let's drop the big one and see what happens

We give them money-but are they grateful?
No, they're spiteful and they're hateful
They don't respect us-so let's surprise them
We'll drop the big one and pulverize them

Asia's crowded and Europe's too old
Africa is far too hot
And Canada's too cold
And South America stole our name
Let's drop the big one
There'll be no one left to blame us

We'll save Australia
Don't wanna hurt no kangaroo
We'll build an All American amusement park there
They got surfin', too

Boom goes London and boom Paris
More room for you and more room for me
And every city the whole world round
Will just be another American town
Oh, how peaceful it will be
We'll set everybody free
You'll wear a Japanese kimono
And there'll be Italian shoes for me

They all hate us anyhow
So let's drop the big one now
Let's drop the big one now

powerclown · 01-19-2007, 01:30 PM

Edwards, DARPA explore new C-17 capability
by Christopher Ball
95th Air Base Wing Public Affairs

10/7/2005 - EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. (AFPN) -- Soaring 6,000 feet above the sun-baked California desert, a pair of Edwards aircraft -- a C-17 Globemaster III shadowed by a C-12 Huron observer aircraft -- carried out an unusual mission with an even more unusual cargo recently.

The rear of the aircraft yawned open, and at the prompt of "five, four, three, two, one, green light," the loadmasters released the restraints and a 65-foot rocket slid out the back of the aircraft beginning its descent to the desert floor.

The rocket drop was a test mission -- the first of a series dubbed the Falcon Small Launch Vehicle program. The program is a joint venture between the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Air Force. It is designed to develop a new method of putting a 1,000-pound payload into low-Earth orbit.

This first test was the successful drop of an inert version of a QuickReach Booster rocket filled with water to increase its weight to 50,000 pounds -- about two-thirds the weight of an actual booster.

To compensate for the difference in weight and the center of gravity, the aircraft was put on autopilot at the moment of the release, said Maj. Landon Henderson, a 418th Flight Test Squadron test pilot.

"Fifty-thousand pounds going out the back is a pretty big change," he said.

Major Henderson said this flight was doubly exciting for him. Not only was the mission “fun,” but it was also his final flight here.

The test vehicle is also the longest article ever dropped from a C-17.

Another unique aspect of this mission was the method of getting the test vehicle out of the C-17. In most airdrops, the cargo is strapped to pallets, and the whole package is ejected from the aircraft.

"For this test, a system of rollers was developed to guide the inert rocket out of the aircraft," said Chris Webber, a 418th FLTS test project engineer. "This was quite an exciting event. It ended up going out very clean ... but there's always that anticipation of the unknown."

The Falcon SLV program is ultimately aimed toward affordable space lift. The current price of launching a rocket payload can be $20 million or more. Completion of the Falcon project should reduce that price tag to less than $5 million.

Dr. Steve Walker, DARPA's program manager for the Falcon SLV, said the developing capability will give U.S. forces a huge advantage because of its affordability and flexibility.

The affordability of the system is enhanced by its simplicity, DARPA officials said. Since traditional rockets launch from the ground, a complicated and expensive rocket nozzle must be used to compensate for altitude variation.

"Because the rocket is launched at altitude, it takes advantage of higher performing and extremely simple nozzles, which can be optimized for the higher altitude condition," Dr. Walker said. "Also, propane fuel can be self pressurized at that altitude, so no turbopumps or pressure feed systems are required to force propellant into the combustion chamber."

Another advantage to launching a satellite by air is the launch location and time is limitless. Currently, rocket launches are dictated by the location of launch facilities and many other factors including weather. By putting the system on a C-17, there is no limit to geographic location, and the aircraft can fly away from or above the weather.

"The Airlaunch rocket can be flown anywhere in the world in any unmodified C-17," Dr. Walker said. "This capability can be used by other services, especially the Army, to put tactical intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance satellites into low-Earth orbit. These tactical satellites could be used and controlled by combatant commanders, supplying the frontline warfighter with in-orbit ISR capability."

This first test, dropping a mock-up rocket from 6,000 feet, was designed to test the safety of the release system, program officials said. Future drops will be at increasingly higher altitudes, ultimately testing the drop of a live rocket, which will launch at altitude after leaving the aircraft.

---

---

China, so big and unwieldly.
Trillions of angry, starving peasants wash Beijing into sea.
It would make quite a racket.

---

It appears the US Military have aircraft capable of launching a satellite from anywhere on the planet at anytime.
I was unaware of this, and find it remarkable.
Maybe the military foresaw just such a scenario as outlined in the OP.
The only reasonable outcome, as The_Jazz keenly pointed out, is Cold War 2.
China doesn't win Cold War 2.
America wins Cold War 2.
I've been trying to envision weapon systems in shapes other than phalluses.
Possible aerodynamic alternatives, for example.
Practical shapes for practical measures.
A shuriken, for example.
Circular, with repeating hotspots.
Like a static chaingun.
I bet Rumsfeld likes shurikens because they are cheap and simple to make.
Even bullets are phallic-shaped.
Penetrative ability.
Yet there is also the slice wound to compromise dermal integrity.
I'm sure the government, all governments, are on it.
Thinking out loud here.

---

mixedmedia,

Randy Newman is great.
Great voice.
I like "Short People"

Willravel · 01-19-2007, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

That's gay.

/threadjack

mixedmedia · 01-19-2007, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

That's gay.

/threadjack

not if it's a she-plane

jorgelito · 01-19-2007, 02:03 PM

Jazz, one main difference between the US-USSR binary and the US-China one is that the economies of US-China are much more closely tied. US action in China would yield a Pyrrhic victory in that the US could potentially destroy much of it's own and allies' factories, companies etc. Likewise, disrupting US economy is NOT beneficial to China either so they have even less incentive to attack.

No, I think one has to look at the regional context first. What is China most concerned with?

Mostly, to not be attacked so it takes on a mostly defensive posture.

Second, to make sure Taiwan does not declare independence nor have any other country interfere there. Most of China's military strategy involves national defense and the Taiwan Scenario.

Thirdly, China wants to reclaim its former glory and prestige by being recognized as the dominant regional power and a global power as well.

While it is true that China is actively seeking to modernize and improve its military capability, one has to look at it's function to understand the motive.
a. China wants a better navy, a "blue water" navy rather than be the coast guard that it is now. Why the projection of naval power? To protect its shipping lanes, specifically the Straights of Malacca where most of China's imported oil flows through. China is concerned because of the large US naval presence there. Basically, China is trying to protect it's resources. Secondly, to better "deal" with the Taiwan issue. Until China improves its navy, especially amphibious assault and landing, invading Taiwan is just a pipe dream.

b. China knows that it is 50 years behind in military power. At best, it may reach 20 years behind. So China has to develop a different strategy. Recent defensive white papers show that China is looking to reduce its standing army and traditional formation in favor of more slim, sleek and flexible fighting units. Cyber warfare and other "assassin" style tactics are now the goal. So updating computer command and control is the Chinese goal for updating its military.

The context of a post Cold war, Post-9/11 globalized economy is also different than the Cold War era. I don't think there is much of a parallel there.

roachboy · 01-19-2007, 02:03 PM

a cold war type scenario would be the stupidest possible outcome of this.
of course, that kind of production is good for military contractors and other such corporate persons, and the idiot neocons could then make up a world that made sense to them, so it's plausible that a rationale could be cooked up for fucking up what seems like a simple diplomatic matter.

i have to say that the missle taking that plane from behind to be a bit disconcerting.
i dont know why exactly.
maybe its because i found myself wondering if the missle bought the plane dinner first.

Elphaba · 01-19-2007, 03:50 PM

Will and Mixed...go to your rooms for threadjacking and making me waste a bit of white wine.

powerclown · 01-19-2007, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

That's gay.

Good lord I missed that.
And the name of the rocket, too.
Didn't somebody once say, "Sometimes a 65-foot QuickReach Booster Rocket...is just a 65-foot QuickReach Booster Rocket."
Maybe this is all just a bad joke.

01-19-2007, 10:33 AM	#3 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	"no two countries that both had a McDonald's had fought a war against each other, since each got its McDonald's." - Thomas Friedman shrug I dunno, I kind of agree with this theory. But maybe I'm just an optimist. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

01-19-2007, 10:40 AM	#4 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	I'm more of a student of the Cold War than the rest of you, I guess. What have the Chinese done here that doesn't have a direct analogy with what the USSR did during the Cold War? I mean the Soviets had the following technologies before us or close enough that it didn't matter: satellites, manned space flight, hydrogen bomb, nuclear-tipped missles, sea launched nuclear weapons, mobile ICBM launchers, etc. etc. I don't really want to see it happen, but wouldn't an arms race be beneficial in some regards, especially when it comes to Japanese economic assistance? __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

01-19-2007, 10:48 AM	#6 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i am not sure of the significance of this test: it seems to me mostly theater aimed at some diplomatic end, probably somehow tied in with the (presumably dormant, but who knows) bush people signal from a few years ago to pursue the reagan-era delusion called "star wars". but maybe i too am an optimist. i am much more concerned about what the neocons are thinking about doing relative to iran. what appears to be happening there is curious: ahmadinejad finds himself in a very weak position politically of late, and there seems to be alot of pressure on him to back off the confrontational posture he has adopted about the nuclear program--which has more to do with the un sanctions than with american carrier-gathering in the gulf--but i wonder if the bush people would be stupid enough to do something, like launch airstrikes. if ahmadinejad's government falls, then i think the pretexts would fall with him--so the weakenss of his position at present may not be a good thing. i would not be surprised to read something about an american strike against iran soon. then the shit would hit the fan. i dont want to think about it much, though. paranoia is way too easy. as for the future of the us, i have no idea. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

01-19-2007, 12:33 PM	#9 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	One other thought - given that China now has the 3rd largest nuclear force (behind the US and Russia), why in the world would the US ever launch a first-strike campaign against them? Not only would it be suicide since the Chinese have the landbased missles and missle submarines, but it would be global suicide. Maybe a nuclear winter is the Bush administration's way to combat global warming. Paranoia indeed. __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

01-19-2007, 02:03 PM	#15 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	a cold war type scenario would be the stupidest possible outcome of this. of course, that kind of production is good for military contractors and other such corporate persons, and the idiot neocons could then make up a world that made sense to them, so it's plausible that a rationale could be cooked up for fucking up what seems like a simple diplomatic matter. i have to say that the missle taking that plane from behind to be a bit disconcerting. i dont know why exactly. maybe its because i found myself wondering if the missle bought the plane dinner first. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

01-19-2007, 10:29 AM	#2 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Everything will happen in this order: 1) War on terror (targeting oil rich Middle Eastern countries) 2) War on drugs (this will escalate, and the US will probably have large scale military ops in Central and South America, where there juse happens to be oil) 3) War on tyrany (time to take out China and Russia) 1 and 2 will bankrupt us to a point where the dollar is nothing, and 3 will probably lead to very large attacks on US soil. This is probably how things will end for the empire, and the US will break up into smaller countries, since cerntralized power will be gone. The West coast will be a smoking hole. By then, I will be in Europe (Italy, Switzerland, Germany, who knows?) and so will the rest of my family. I hope I'm wrong.

01-19-2007, 10:41 AM	#5 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	This thread really belongs in Paranoia. It's a bit early to jump the gun and hit the panic button here. All the Chinese have demonstrated is that they can shoot down their own satellites. Something that the US and Russia have been able to do since the mid-80's. I didn't hear any threat aimed at anyone. There was no announcement that US satellites are now to be targets of Chinese missiles. I do agree that there is a potential threat but really, it's just a witch hunt at this moment. I do not think the Chinese want to take out anyone's satellites (it doesn't help them at all). I do think they want to be respected as a power to be reckoned with and the test serves as a reminder that they are up and coming. There will be no "destruction" of China as that is not in the US interest (won't resolve anything). There is no profit to be made by starting a war with China (at this time as far as I can see). More cooperation and engagement with China is better. Ultimately, our soft power will win out.

01-19-2007, 11:11 AM	#7 (permalink)
powerclown Junkie Location: Detroit, MI	It's a lot of land America could use for theme parks, shopping malls and heavy weapons factories.

01-19-2007, 11:20 AM	#8 (permalink)
Carno Junkie	Welcome to 1985, China.

01-19-2007, 01:30 PM	#11 (permalink)
powerclown Junkie Location: Detroit, MI	Edwards, DARPA explore new C-17 capability by Christopher Ball 95th Air Base Wing Public Affairs 10/7/2005 - EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. (AFPN) -- Soaring 6,000 feet above the sun-baked California desert, a pair of Edwards aircraft -- a C-17 Globemaster III shadowed by a C-12 Huron observer aircraft -- carried out an unusual mission with an even more unusual cargo recently. The rear of the aircraft yawned open, and at the prompt of "five, four, three, two, one, green light," the loadmasters released the restraints and a 65-foot rocket slid out the back of the aircraft beginning its descent to the desert floor. The rocket drop was a test mission -- the first of a series dubbed the Falcon Small Launch Vehicle program. The program is a joint venture between the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Air Force. It is designed to develop a new method of putting a 1,000-pound payload into low-Earth orbit. This first test was the successful drop of an inert version of a QuickReach Booster rocket filled with water to increase its weight to 50,000 pounds -- about two-thirds the weight of an actual booster. To compensate for the difference in weight and the center of gravity, the aircraft was put on autopilot at the moment of the release, said Maj. Landon Henderson, a 418th Flight Test Squadron test pilot. "Fifty-thousand pounds going out the back is a pretty big change," he said. Major Henderson said this flight was doubly exciting for him. Not only was the mission “fun,” but it was also his final flight here. The test vehicle is also the longest article ever dropped from a C-17. Another unique aspect of this mission was the method of getting the test vehicle out of the C-17. In most airdrops, the cargo is strapped to pallets, and the whole package is ejected from the aircraft. "For this test, a system of rollers was developed to guide the inert rocket out of the aircraft," said Chris Webber, a 418th FLTS test project engineer. "This was quite an exciting event. It ended up going out very clean ... but there's always that anticipation of the unknown." The Falcon SLV program is ultimately aimed toward affordable space lift. The current price of launching a rocket payload can be $20 million or more. Completion of the Falcon project should reduce that price tag to less than $5 million. Dr. Steve Walker, DARPA's program manager for the Falcon SLV, said the developing capability will give U.S. forces a huge advantage because of its affordability and flexibility. The affordability of the system is enhanced by its simplicity, DARPA officials said. Since traditional rockets launch from the ground, a complicated and expensive rocket nozzle must be used to compensate for altitude variation. "Because the rocket is launched at altitude, it takes advantage of higher performing and extremely simple nozzles, which can be optimized for the higher altitude condition," Dr. Walker said. "Also, propane fuel can be self pressurized at that altitude, so no turbopumps or pressure feed systems are required to force propellant into the combustion chamber." Another advantage to launching a satellite by air is the launch location and time is limitless. Currently, rocket launches are dictated by the location of launch facilities and many other factors including weather. By putting the system on a C-17, there is no limit to geographic location, and the aircraft can fly away from or above the weather. "The Airlaunch rocket can be flown anywhere in the world in any unmodified C-17," Dr. Walker said. "This capability can be used by other services, especially the Army, to put tactical intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance satellites into low-Earth orbit. These tactical satellites could be used and controlled by combatant commanders, supplying the frontline warfighter with in-orbit ISR capability." This first test, dropping a mock-up rocket from 6,000 feet, was designed to test the safety of the release system, program officials said. Future drops will be at increasingly higher altitudes, ultimately testing the drop of a live rocket, which will launch at altitude after leaving the aircraft. --- --- China, so big and unwieldly. Trillions of angry, starving peasants wash Beijing into sea. It would make quite a racket. --- It appears the US Military have aircraft capable of launching a satellite from anywhere on the planet at anytime. I was unaware of this, and find it remarkable. Maybe the military foresaw just such a scenario as outlined in the OP. The only reasonable outcome, as The_Jazz keenly pointed out, is Cold War 2. China doesn't win Cold War 2. America wins Cold War 2. I've been trying to envision weapon systems in shapes other than phalluses. Possible aerodynamic alternatives, for example. Practical shapes for practical measures. A shuriken, for example. Circular, with repeating hotspots. Like a static chaingun. I bet Rumsfeld likes shurikens because they are cheap and simple to make. Even bullets are phallic-shaped. Penetrative ability. Yet there is also the slice wound to compromise dermal integrity. I'm sure the government, all governments, are on it. Thinking out loud here. --- mixedmedia, Randy Newman is great. Great voice. I like "Short People"

01-19-2007, 02:03 PM	#14 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	Jazz, one main difference between the US-USSR binary and the US-China one is that the economies of US-China are much more closely tied. US action in China would yield a Pyrrhic victory in that the US could potentially destroy much of it's own and allies' factories, companies etc. Likewise, disrupting US economy is NOT beneficial to China either so they have even less incentive to attack. No, I think one has to look at the regional context first. What is China most concerned with? Mostly, to not be attacked so it takes on a mostly defensive posture. Second, to make sure Taiwan does not declare independence nor have any other country interfere there. Most of China's military strategy involves national defense and the Taiwan Scenario. Thirdly, China wants to reclaim its former glory and prestige by being recognized as the dominant regional power and a global power as well. While it is true that China is actively seeking to modernize and improve its military capability, one has to look at it's function to understand the motive. a. China wants a better navy, a "blue water" navy rather than be the coast guard that it is now. Why the projection of naval power? To protect its shipping lanes, specifically the Straights of Malacca where most of China's imported oil flows through. China is concerned because of the large US naval presence there. Basically, China is trying to protect it's resources. Secondly, to better "deal" with the Taiwan issue. Until China improves its navy, especially amphibious assault and landing, invading Taiwan is just a pipe dream. b. China knows that it is 50 years behind in military power. At best, it may reach 20 years behind. So China has to develop a different strategy. Recent defensive white papers show that China is looking to reduce its standing army and traditional formation in favor of more slim, sleek and flexible fighting units. Cyber warfare and other "assassin" style tactics are now the goal. So updating computer command and control is the Chinese goal for updating its military. The context of a post Cold war, Post-9/11 globalized economy is also different than the Cold War era. I don't think there is much of a parallel there.

01-19-2007, 03:50 PM	#16 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Will and Mixed...go to your rooms for threadjacking and making me waste a bit of white wine.