3.5 Ton Satellite to Crash Back to Earth

DeadBugs writes "CNN is reporting that the NASA Extreme Ultraviolet Explorer could crash back to earth in a matter of days. It's estimated that up to 9 large pieces (4-100 lbs.) of the Satellite could survive re-entry. Unlike the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory that was guided in, this Satellite will be uncontrolled. The EUVE has only been up there since 1992.... I wonder when this sort of thing will start to be a more common event."

Comments

first post

[keshto]

I wonder if they can predict what the "catchment area" of the debris is going to be.. -keshto

The *what* Ultraviolet Explorer?

[Have Blue]

Did NASA think they had to get hip to the 90's X-games obsession or something? Take ultraviolet measurements WHILE SNOWBOARDING!

Re:Insurance?

[Leven Valera]

My homeowner's insurance actually covers impact by falling equipment, meaning telephone poles usually, but I guess satellites could be covered.

LV

Food for thought

[Boiling_point_]

Self-destruct mechanisms as a design feature for all sattelites...

Could you design a sattelite in such a way that it could be destroyed remotely, ie. blown into small chunks that pose no danger to other spacecraft (are "blasted" towards Earth and therefore certain disintegration), while maintaining stability during launch/operation and not adding too much to the total weight?

Devil's advocate:

Who'd enforce it? Corporations won't pay extra for a very unlikely liability problem (until such a time that we're lobbing dozens of big things into space daily)

What circumstances (other than system failure) would cause you to push the button - and if it had failed, who's to say it's pointed the right way and you won't shoot your comsat into the ISS?
Sorry - just thinking out loud...IANARS

Re:Considering there are 7000 objects in orbit

[interiot]

The article mentions that this satellite was designed to be decommisioned this way-- no steering mechanism was included. Is this a common occurance? Can't the designers be held liable if damage occurs?

They should make a law!

[John Harrison]

Any satellites put into orbit should be required to have the capability of being brought down safely. Maybe this doesn't need to become a requirement for all satellites. Little ones that will burn up totally aren't a problem. However, satellites that have parts that aren't going to burn up nicely on re-entry need to be able to be redirected to the oceans. Imagine the amount of energy the 100 lb. chunck of flaming hot iron from this satellite is packing.

If they could control this thing and bring it down when and where they wanted they could potentially do some interesting stuff. Like having it streak over the opening ceremonies at the Olympics. Or if the had REALLY fine control they could light the olynpic calderon with it instead of using the torch. That would be even better than the flaming arrow. Or they could drop it on Bin Laden's head. Ok, now I am getting silly.

ps I am bitter because I submitted this exact article and had it rejected several hours before it appeared.

Re:Considering there are 7000 objects in orbit

[Cruciform]

Or one of these people?

In November 1954 a housewife in Alabama was struck by a 3-lb (1.4 kg) meteor that smashed through her roof, bounced off some furniture, and struck her in the hip as she lay sleeping. She received a large bruise but no other harm.

In October 1992 a 26-lb (12 kg) meteor punched clear through the trunk of an automobile in Peekskill, New York, wrecking the aged Chevrolet (but also turning it into an instant collector's item that sold for over $20,000).

In June 1994 a man driving near Madrid, Spain suffered a broken finger when a 3-lb (1.4 kg) meteor crashed through his car's windshield and smashed the steering wheel, ending up in the back seat.

or here.

Unfortunately I couldn't find the link to the central park jogger that got nailed a few years ago. Although all it did was bounce off him. It made many major newspapers though. Anyone got a reference?

Ya know, it's too bad they can't just harvest it

[PsiPsiStar]

Considering how much it costs to send a pound of anything into space, it's too bad they couldn't just send it into geostationary orbit maneuver it to where a space station could get at it so they'd at least have the spare parts/metal up there.

Of course, my closet is full of old computer parts, so you see how I think.

This already is common.

[Performer Guy]

Space junk deorbits all the time. It just doesn't get the same publicity, some of the junk includes upper stage boosters including tons of fuel and a payload. The amount of rock naturally falling out of the sky is still more than the deorbiting garbage but nobody seems to worry about that, despite it destroying the occasional roof or car like these incidents:

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/ pe rseids_shower_sidebar_000809.html

Re:Odds

[saider]

These probabilities are usually the computed from an analysis of death reports. As such these odds indicate that more people are killed every year by satellite debris than win the lottery. If twenty or so people win the lottery annually, then how many people die from satellite debris each year? This seems to be a more newsworthy event, but yet I never seem to hear about it.