Slashdot Mirror
USA 193 Shootdown Set For Feb 21, 03:30 UTC
An anonymous reader writes "Amateur satellite watcher Ted Molczan notes that a "Notice to Airmen" (NOTAM) has been issued announcing restricted airspace for February 21, between 02:30 and 05:00 UTC, in a region near Hawaii. Stricken satellite USA 193, which the US has announced plans to shoot down, will pass over this area at about 03:30. Interestingly, this is during the totality of Wednesday's lunar eclipse, which may or may not make debris easier to observe."
if they chose the eclipse date on purpose. We'll wait and see what they say AFTER it all happens.
... they're going to use a pop bottle to do the deed.
Bruce is a fellow satellite spotter also with some degree of background and in the subject matter and has good coverage here.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
A super secret sat is not responding for unknown reasons. This requires a shootdown which just happens to occur during a lunar eclipse.
Wow, who gets the movie rights for this one?
Yep, I never spell check.
More incorrect spellings can be found he
They're shooting it down not because it might hit and blow up, but because it might hit and not blow up, and yield a lot of classified hardware/software for some enterprising person(s) to pick up.
Since that time interval occurs during daylight hours near Hawaii, with the eclipsed moon (necessarily) below the horizon, I doubt the eclipse will have much effect on visibility. :)
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a skull.
50's called. They want their missiles back.
Disappointing. We need to LASER it.
The ill-tempered sea bass have a limited range, sorry.
This post may or may not be a way to tell you that may or may not is a totally ambigious statement. Some people may or may not notice this. I may or may not be modded Offtopic but I can also be modded +1 Funny or +1 Insightfull. However, this may or may not be the case.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
Am I the only one who thinks this is TOTALLY COOL???
Sure it might be dangerous and stupid, too, but hey.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
:(){
I find your post a little hard to follow, however with regard to space debris, the satellite is sufficiently low that all the debris is expected to deorbit relatively quickly (days or weeks).
Grr! Arg!
While perhaps a bit unconventional, there's a lot to be said for our government's decisive action here that could prevent a small-scale disaster if the satellite were to hit the ground. It seems like the prudent thing to do.
*cough*THEL*cough*
An airplane needs an engine to fly, and when that engine is destroyed and crashes somewhere near where you shot it down. A satellite needs no engine to fly, and when you shoot at it, it becomes thousands of little satellites, all of which continue to "fly" at 25,000 miles per hour.
I hope the people shooting at (not "down") this satellite have seen "Fantasia." In _The Sorceror's Apprentice,_ Mickey Mouse decides that the best way to deal with an out-of-control magic broom is to chop it into thousands of pieces... all of which just keep right on going, making the problem worse instead of better.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Who's going to film this and post it?
That this is just a response to China's ASAT test of January last year?
China: you see, we can blow up your satellites!!
USA: aha! We can blow up your satellites too!!
General public: Why are they blowing up satellites?
How we know is more important than what we know.
IF they get a hit, then the explosion may or may not get blasted into space where it could do damage. Very small particles in space make a very big impact at say, 23,000mph, or faster still. Although we have great resolution on observing space junk in tiny sizes, we're doing the essentially the same thing that the Chinese did when they shot down an orbiter.
Azimuth, zenith, and charge value will dictate what happens. Might be a clean kill. Might not. I wouldn't take the Army's word for much, however, they're the ones that goosed it in the first place.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
I doubt the lunar eclipse has anything to do with it. The timing is almost certainly based on the need to get the SBX to sea and in position (it's not exactly a speedboat), and the best orbital conditions for the shot. The location was almost certainly based on the SBX being in Hawaii and having nice long empty stretches of ocean downrange for the SM-3 missile. (Both for the booster and for the payload to fall if it misses.)
No doubt goats will be slaughtered, wiccans consulted, and pentagrams drawn all in the hope that our missile intercept technology will actually work in a non-staged event.
Have gnu, will travel.
via paypal for anyone who can furnish me with the TLE updated at least once a day for this sat. Or better yet post them to a public forum for everyone to enjoy. -CS
The satellite is being blown up because its about to crash into the planet. Why do you suppose the debris will stay up any longer?
I demand a front row seat. I helped pay for the satellite and the missile to kill it. At least they could offer to sit me on my lawn chair with my cooler full of beer to watch it.
No?
OK fine. I would pay extra to put my lawn chair and cooler full of beer on the cruiser. I wanna big screen display hanging off the bridge with a feed from the ISS.
No! What? Regulations my Ass!
Fucking US government can't even generate revenue from what should be a spectacular PPV event.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
Are there any Slashdotters here in Hawaii?? Surely a missile zooming up to shoot down a satellite would be visible, would it not?
...and the date has been confirmed
But I've got a giant container of Jiffy-Pop popcorn on that satelite! How am I supposed to pop it now, and embarrass the traiterous professor?
I'll think of something...
"If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."
- Seneca
What if someone mounted a camera on the missile? Would that be less disappointing? (Maybe) Would that make it cooler to watch? (Hell, yeah!)
"osake no hou ga, biiru yori ii" to omotteiru.
What will they blame this on? Since they have already used "a ship dropped it's anchor on the wire" for the Middle East Internet blackout, so here's some good excuses for our classic government:
Or some ways to cover the whole thing up:
So, is anyone planning on getting this on tape? I'd love a DivX video of the launch
Fixed
I'm surprised we didn't outsource this to China.
I really hope the weapons officer who gets to push the missile-firing button says: "ASSIMILATE THIS!!!"
No doubt goats will be slaughtered, wiccans consulted, and pentagrams drawn all in the hope that our missile intercept technology will actually work in a non-staged event.
And if it works? What then? How many successful test intercepts do you need before you think that the thing might actually work? Seriously, the only reason some folks are arguing that they don't think missile defense can work is because they do not like the politics of it. Eventually, missile defense can and will work. It's just an engineering problem, after all.
I for one do not think the USA should be deploying interceptors in Poland to antagonize the Russians, but, I've got no problem with spending a bunch of billions a year to give the USA a unique capability in a world where every country is working to develop ICBMs.
This is my sig.
- They don't want a repeat of Skylab where parts landed in Australia and made us look bad.
- If it comes down in Russia (Russia spans 11 time zones so that's not too unlikely) they don't want the Russians to be able to figure out much from the debris.
- They want a chance to test their anti-satellite weaponry on a real target that isn't saying "Over here! I'm over here! Here I am! Yoo Hoo!"
There's actually a 4th reason - blowing stuff up is fun but they would never cop to it.This depends on the azimuth and zenith and charge of the missile used to shoot it 'down'. You're basing your information on unreliable sources.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Actually, it doesn't. Orbital mechanics guarantee that the debris will pass through the same altitude one orbit later.
Why do you suppose the debris will stay up any longer?
SOME of it will. Parts of the missile, as well as some of the debris from the satellite will end up in a higher orbit because of the impact. I don't want to say "explosion" because in space explosions are different - without an atmospheric pressure wave - all you have is the hot, expanding gas from the explosive itself, and the shrapnel.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
is around 900 mi NW of Kauai - has anybody calculated whether the engagement will be visible from Kauai? I'd assume a minimum intercept altitude of 100 miles, probably will be higher, but I don't have the orbital elements handy. Could be some good videos from those with telescopes > 6" mirror diameter.
That's certainly believable if you can take Deputy National Security Advisor James Jeffrey at his word:Apparently man-made objects containing hydrazine propellant frequently rain down from the sky without incident, according to rocket scientists and space security experts who "scoff" at this rationale. And Joint Chiefs of Staff Vice Chairman Gen. James Cartwright doesn't seem too impressed either. But surely our Deputy National Security Advisor knows something about hydrazine that we don't.
Now who is this man James Jeffrey, you may ask?Source: Wall Street Journal, July 19, 2007, four months before the information in the Iran NIE would be exposed, having been known to the White House since 2006.
This guy sounds totally not full of shit at all!
Think about it. For any instantaneous energy input (a missile explosion is close enough) the new orbit is going to intersect the old one at the point of explosion. So long as the satellite isn't in an extremely elliptical orbit (doubtful, spy satellites are in fairly circular orbits) and they're not dumb enough to blow it up at apogee, all the bits will spend a good part of their time subject to the same drag that's bringing down the satellite. Of course, the bits have a much higher surface to volume ratio, so the drag will have a greater effect on them.
It's an SM-3, not an SM-2. And it will still be broad daylight in that area around Hawaii, so I don't think the eclipse will be much help.
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
Along the lines of the self-destruct, I agree that a satellite which absolutely could not be allowed to return to Earth intact would be built with the proper destructive methods.
However, a self-destruct would also be useful in cases just like this, where the danger is not classified information, but hazardous materials. I am assuming that satellites are usually launched with the anticipation of decaying orbits, so why not build satellites with standard self-destruct for cases like this?
It seems like a relatively common occurrence (Skylab, anyone?) and seems like it would be a lot less expensive and require less logistical planning than having to time a missile interception.
Oh, and to top it off, the Moon won't be above the horizon yet in that area, either.
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
During the "shoot down" period it will be daytime in Hawaii and the Moon will be below the horizon. I don't think that the eclipse is a factor here.
I hate the term "shoot down." Everything will still be in orbit, just in smaller pieces.
I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of sending a spy satellite into orbit and returning it destructively to Earth.
You're in luck! I've seen such movies. They're out there on YouTube for the anti-missile tests that have already taken place. Start searching!
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
General agreement, but... what the heck does the Army have to do with this?
Not a damned thing, that's what.
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
is that true?
is a spiral, where it gets closer and closer, albeit potentially very slowly, not an orbit then?
If so, I guess nothing can be in a real orbit, since it would be impossible to be exactly right...everything would be going too fast or too slow by some amount or other.
Max.
...Putin commands the satellite to shoot down you, your family, your close friends, your distant acquaintances, your neighbor's pet rabbit and the kid who called him "stuck-up" in third grade. This is ?
FYI, it seems to be in a very circular orbit (as would be expected from the circularizing effect of the atmospheric drag): the altitude only ranges from 251 to 257 km, and its eccentricity is about 0.00051, if that means anything to you. So no, certainly not extremely elliptical.
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
Thinking about it...but not getting very far really :|
:(
Isn't 'the point of explosion' changing? I mean, this satellite is actually going to hit the Earth at some point, no? I mean, it is getting closer to Earth and so is not in an orbit, right?
If the missile gave all it's energy to just one small bit of the satellite, then it could escape the gravitational pull althogether, or does that just not happen and the gravitational pull is still there, but very small?
Does this mean that all the things we send up into space will eventually come back again? This doesn't sound right to me.
In any case, why can't they use this hydrozine (or whatever) to make it stay up there, or come down faster/etc/etc? Have they lost control? I guess I should read TFA - I hate having to do that
Sorry, I didn't do Physics 101, or whatever that is (sounds like a US thing to me).
Max.
I had a chat with my grandfather who works on attitude control systems for commercial satellites about hydrazine. Hydrazine is used for attitude control and orbit stabilization. Since contact was never made with this USA 193, the hydrazine tank should be full. The ignition for hydrazine is heat, so all they do to fire it is have a little toaster that ignites a little bit of fuel at a time. Because the ignition source is heat, the hydrazine tank has to be incredibly well insulated to maintain a constant temperature. If the tank were to survive reentry, by being shielded by other components melting off, it would most likely rupture when it hit the ground at terminal velocity. Hydrazine is a pretty serious hazmat, and even a small concentration of that into your system will do serious, potentially permanent or even fatal damage to your lungs. Even worse, the hydrazine could ignite upon hitting the Earth and cause a small explosion, though the gas leak is more likely. If you took the surface of the earth and divided it into 1 acre chunks, I doubt more than 5% of those acres would have people in them( figure 10% of the Earth is inhabited, and large portions of that are farm) Nevertheless, a 1/20 chance of killing/permanently damaging anywhere from 1(hits near Bear Grylls in the desert) to 10,000 people(hits Rio), it certainly seems like a politically influenced decision to get rid of a potential disaster.
A hyperbolic orbit?!? That's sheer hyperbole! You don't get a hyperbolic orbit until you reach escape velocity. And how the heck could a hyperbolic orbit be "more hyperbolic," anyway? It is or it isn't, kinda like "a little bit pregnant." And if a trajectory is hyperbolic (it's not really an "orbit" as such, then), then it only has one perigee, not these "perigees" that you mentioned, and is on a one-way ticket out of the Earth-Moon system (assuming that's what it's hyperbolic relative to), without any further "bleeding" causing "deorbiting".
In short, "you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
ProofReading Markup Language - and yes, I find typos.
Spy satellites (or any imaging/mapping sats) are usually in very circular orbits. Otherwise your image resolution gets degraded for most of the orbit (because you're farther away) and you have to constantly keep track to figure out what the actual resolution IS. As you pointed out, atmospheric drag tends to circularize things as well.
What does that have to do with the dolphins with lasers on their heads?
Okay, forget for a minute that the orbit is decaying. Whether or not a decaying orbit is "in orbit" is kind of a philosophical question.
So imagine the satellite in a stable orbit. Then you blow it up. So some pieces go flying in all directions. If you work out the orbital mechanics, every one of those pieces will be in a different orbit, but all of those orbits will pass through the point of the explosion. Caveats: this isn't true of orbits that intersect the ground first, or bits that, as you noted, get flung out of orbit altogether - that is, they achieve escape velocity. Escape velocity is awfully fast though, so that's probably not an issue here, and if something does hit escape velocity then it's not going to be a problem for us because that chunk of satellite will be GONE.
That's the reason you can't fire things into orbit with a gun (railgun, whatever), by the way. Any "orbit" you can put it into will have a point intersecting your gun. In order to put something in orbit that way you'd have to fire it out of the gun, then have a rocket on board to fire later and put it into an orbit that doesn't intersect the ground.
You can't actually escape the gravitation of anything, much less a planet. Technically, Earth, the sun, your toothbrush, will all pull on you (very weakly) no matter how far away you get. What you're thinking of is escape velocity, the speed at which you will never fall back, but continue on (slower and slower) outward forever.
Things we send into space can go a few different ways. If it's above escape velocity (Voyager, say) then it will never come back. If it's in a nice high orbit, way above the atmosphere (like geosynchronous satellites) then it will stay up for a LONG time. It will probably eventually come down, because there are always a few stray particles and things, but not for a long, long time. Things on a suborbital trajectory will come back down without circling the planet. Like SpaceShip One. Or you can have a low orbit, like spy satellites and the space shuttle. The atmosphere at that altitude is really thin, but not non-existent, so without thrusters to boost the orbit those sats will come back down, often on a fairly short time scale. The space station is fairly high (and massive) but if I recall correctly, it's orbit will decay in something less than a year without periodic boosting.
The problem with the satellite is that they've lost control. It isn't responding to commands. So it has lots of fuel (hydrazine) but the controllers have no way to fire the thrusters.
As someone else pointed out, orbital mechanics is kind of a counterintuitive thing. You'd think you could shoot things into orbit with a big enough gun, or that blowing up a satellite could boost some bits of it into stable orbits, but it turns out not to work that way. Something else weird: when you thrust in the same direction as you're traveling you slow down. You gain altitude, but you slow down - the opposite of what we normally expect. These satellite bits are speeding up (and losing altitude) due to atmospheric friction.
It will be daylight in Hawaii, for a start. Moreover, I highly doubt they are going for a visual target acquisition on this one.
Negativeland - Escape From Noise?
The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
Also in soviet Russia F117's shot down in Serbia years
ago are reverse engineered to make stealth cruise missiles
for the Bear Bombers that recently went back on patrol.
http://www.janes.com/extracts/extract/jsws/jsws0485.html
I have never looked at my shovel so fondly before.
google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
"Their more concerned about the full tank of hydrazine that would survive a normal reentry and create a hazardous materials nightmare near a populated area. "
Really?
The boiling point of hydrazine is 113.5C (Merck, 1983; CRC, 1994).That is: very low.
I'd really like to now how you can keep a tank inside a molten steel ball at 113C max. I'd even say it's not possible.
The reactors (as used since the soviet crash 30yrs ago) are designed to be a 'chunk', the thing it powers is not. Since the 'chunk' is small, heavy, and moving at considerable speed, it will make a 'crater'. Where the chunk falls out of the debris cloud and forms said crater is anyone's guess.
OTOH: Atmospheric testing demonstrated how nasty plutonium condensate can be in the upper atmosphere and the 'indestructable' reactors have only been tested in the blenderrr..., I mean lab.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Well spirals are orbits, but ones which are perturbed by air resistance. If you ignore air resistance (and relativistic effects), then yes, all orbits would be perfect ellipses (or hyperbolas). In this case, the orbits of any debris will pass through the point of the explosion again, discounting air resistance. In reality, they will pass even lower, due to air (and in many cases, ground) resistance. They only way they could attain a stable (that is, higher than significant air resistance) orbit is if half an orbit after the explosion, they get kicked forward again.
Looks to me like it goes over the Middle East, India, Korea, China, Siberia and then down the west coast of CONUS. It's also not an ELINT bird, so unless they're peeking into people's houses there's not much danger of this being Bush's Watergate.
The Slashdot Paradox: "100% Overrated"
If it's really going to be happening during eclipse totality, that doesn't sound like "broad daylight" ...
Eric Baird
Or maybe there are states in Africa that actually concern our government? Rogue states, of course. Legitimate governments don't concern us because we put them there.
Naval maneuvers would also be handy to spot. I admit to speculating here and will likely get assaulted for it, but I'd think (depending on the altitude and trajectory of the orbit) that passing over North America would give you a good look at both Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.
Do You Experiment?
There's still a last chance to see the satellite before the destruction attempt (or before it disintegrates). Visit one of the many satellite-tracker sites, such as the Heavens-above link below and enter your location to see if you'll have a favorable time to view it (binoculars or naked eyes). http://www.heavens-above.com/usa193.aspx?lat=0&lng=0&loc=Unspecified&alt=0&tz=CET
You're right. I had Dr Stangelove in my brain when I wrote that.....
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
More like they set their initial target using GPS, but ongoing realtime telemetry would use inertial based calculation, with GPS as a backup/check.
Otherwise all an enemy needs to do is launch a few high alt balloons transmitting bogus GPS data.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
If you need to know what time 3:30 is, this article gives offsets from UTC to your time zone.
Fot US Central time its offset is -6 hours, so if my math is correct (don't laugh, I'm still on my first cup of coffee) it should be about 9:00 here.
I wonder if it's a coincidence that they're shooting this thing down during an eclipse?
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Id say a fake test, made to fail, so they can go ask for another 100billion in fony funding.
Afterall , if it works well, there's no need for more funding/testing is there.
Its going to fail REAL REAL WELL!!!
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
You're only looking at the current path over land. Because the Earth rotates, every orbit travels over a different area of the Earth, because the Earth itself has turned. So it basically passes over most land at one point or another.
Grr! Arg!
- China blows up a satellite with a missile to prove it can be done.
- The U.S. says, "knock it off or I'll blot out the moon", launches missile
- Total lunar eclipse commences. Cannibals are impressed.
Oh wait, Columbas tried that already as did that fictional Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's court. Do you think the Cannibals of the world have caught on yet? Nah, surely the rest of the world also has the the attention span and long term memory of a knat.BTW, does anyone know what Britany Spears will be up to during the eclipse?
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
You do understand that the earth has a peculiar shape, right? Let's invent a word and call it "spherical". Being this "spherical" shape, one part of the world is always going to be facing the sun, even if there's another part of the world observing a total eclipse of the moon.
Hawaii is UTC-10. Since this will be happening at 03:30 UTC, that means it will be 17:30 local time. Broad daylight.
Wow... I've not seen a Real Genius reference on Slashdot in years, much less a mostly on-topic one... kudos.
> I find it quaint, the notion that the real reason they have to shoot the satellite down is because it has a tank of hydrazine onboard
If the tank survives to low atmosphere or impacts the earth, the by then gaseous (boiling point 114 C) hydrazine would come flying out when the tank ruptured. It would be heated by the still hot tank shards and explode (flash point 37 C). A 1,000 lbs. cloud of gas burning a large volume of oxygen would leave behind a large vacuum and cause a major implosion. This is how a daisy cutter bomb works. Those are hardly quaint.
And if it didn't blow itself out with an implosion, it'd be a large 800 C fireball. It'd set an enormous fire, another non-quaint outcome. The land areas under the last orbits are southern Africa and mid Russia/Siberia. Lots of flammable land area. Either way the result would be much worse than a few pieces of radioactive material landing in small lumps, such as the Cosmos that crashed into Canada.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
For other systems, they still had some altitude control, and therefore could specify generally where the debris would hit. They have no communication with this satellite. It's a bus-sized LEO meteor with a hydrazine explosive punch when it hits, and it could land almost anywhere in the flight path. Toxicity doesn't really matter as much as the damage it could do if it lands in an inhabited area. This kind of lack of control is pretty well guaranteed to tick off the control-freak types who run the country.
Besides, we want to test our ability to shoot evil badguy satellites out of the sky. Who knows when we'd get another excuse to try that?
Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
Maybe this wasn't a meteorite after all... http://www.tdn.com/articles/2008/02/19/breaking_news/doc47bb0150c4849730374390.txt/
Absolutely correct Billy. But in the context of the GGGP complaining about the explosion causing junk to hang about for centuries I allowed my self the slight inaccuracy. I think I would be completely accurate in saying that due to air resistance, any debris boosted into a more energetic orbit (Total energy = Kinetic + Potential) will pass through the same altitude 1-epsilon orbits latter - even allowing for relativistic corrections.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
No, no joke. I hadn't seen one.
Between coding 40/wk for a living and 24/wk for coursework, the last thing I do on weekends is get on the computer these days. Totally missed the story.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Great, so the US government is using untested software and untested hardware to shoot a big chunk of explosive toxic shit out of the sky over my head. I see absolutely no reason why this should fail.
Question.
Even though there is absolutely no reason this should fail, let's just, you know, theorize. In the unlikely case it doesn't quite go as planned... what is the US government going to use to shoot the wayward missile out of the sky before *it* lands in somebody's backyard?
"Only the small secrets need to be protected. The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity." - Marshall McLuhan
here's a darn funny look at the upcoming launch http://www.theweeklydonut.com/index.php/2008/02/19/when-all-else-fails-blow-it-the-fck-up-part-one/
and its eccentricity is about 0.00051, if that means anything to you.
Yes it does. After all, I have played Orbiter!
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Is there anything in the universe, I wonder, that we cannot abide without throwing bombs and guns into it?
Development is programmable; Discovery is not programmable. (Fuller)
What will happen or not to the hydrazine tank on re-entry has been widely discussed. But what will happen to it right at missile impact time? I read somewhere that the core target was indeed this hydrazine tank. Granted, there is no warhead in the missile, but if the hydrazine tank is touched, I guess it should help the thing to blow off in more pieces with more initial energy. Right? Does that change the picture in terms of debris cloud dispersion (downward and upward)? Strange nobody seems to speak (or think) about that, unless I miss something. Thoughts?
It's like, if someone says that something is going to happen in the sky at a location "at sunrise", you tend to hope that they mean sunrise at that location, otherwise it's a bit of a misleading thing to say.
If the shooting down wasn't actually scheduled
with respect to the area of the shooting-down zone, then I think it was a very misleading article. I mean, if I say that something happened in London "during a total eclipse", you're going to tend to assume that I'm referring to a total eclipse in London, aren't you? As opposed to something happening in London during a total eclipse in, say, Ecuador.If you're saying that the article got its wires crossed, or took a few liberties with phrasing in order to make a better story, I'll take your word for it.
Eric Baird
NOT the satellite being shot at when the moon goes in front of the Sun.
In which case ... what a desperately boring story!
Eric Baird