North Korea's Satellite Is Out of Control

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

North Korea's Satellite Is Out of Control

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Wednesday December 12, 2012 @12:39PM from the wobble-and-bobble dept.

Koreantoast writes "After failing on numerous occasions, North Korea has finally put a satellite in orbit. But according to US officials, it is now 'tumbling out of control.' This is bad news, and more bad news, covered in a double layer of extra bad news. From the article: 'According to US officials, it appears that North Korea's new satellite has failed to achieve a stable orbit and is now "tumbling out of control." The greatest danger is the threat of it colliding with another satellite, adding to the growing debris field around the earth.' A separate Gizmodo article provides links for tracking the current location of the satellite."

20 of 450 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

send the mini-shuttle over there to wack it by peter303 · 2012-12-12 12:40 · Score: 5, Funny

Its unclear if the new min-shuttle has offensive capabilities.
1. Re:send the mini-shuttle over there to wack it by Culture20 · 2012-12-12 13:10 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  The manic depressive ones are the most important to get under control.
2. Re:send the mini-shuttle over there to wack it by clj · 2012-12-12 13:16 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Neither the "mini-shuttle" nor the retired shuttles are in a position to reach the orbit of the NK satellite. It is in a sun-synchronous orbit, which means its orbital inclination is near-polar. The current OTV-3 (mission name of the so-called mini-shuttle) is in an orbit of around 40 degrees, which makes it incapable of reaching the NK satellite's inclination, and no space shuttle ever flew in a polar orbit and nor had any plans/capability to do so after the Challenger accident.
  If I had a nickel for every time I've seen someone propose that two satellites get together in orbit when such a thing is practically impossible, I'd be hundreds of dollars richer...
3. Re:send the mini-shuttle over there to wack it by X0563511 · 2012-12-12 14:17 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  On the flip side, if you can't get a satellite to not die on the way up, what makes you think the nuke's systems will survive?
  
  --
  For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
4. Re:send the mini-shuttle over there to wack it by mug+funky · 2012-12-12 15:05 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  the space shuttle orbiter was armed in the sense that it had an arm.
5. Re:send the mini-shuttle over there to wack it by ridgecritter · 2012-12-12 16:37 · Score: 5
  
  "No it is testing new ion engines that actually allow for decent orbital delta V."
  Citation requested, please.
6. Re:send the mini-shuttle over there to wack it by jonadab · 2012-12-12 21:57 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  This is North Korea we're talking about. The level of incompetence they have displayed, repeatedly and publicly, is difficult to overstate. Quite frankly, botching their first attempt at a satellite launch (something the Soviet Union got right on their first try in 1957) is small potatoes compared to some of their other attempted shenanigans.
  
  Among other things, the tallest structure in the country (a would-be hotel in the capital) was started in 1987, was originally intended to be completed by mid 1989 for some locally important event or another, and at this time is still not ready for use. They're currently hoping to _partially_ open the still-incomplete building in 2013, although one wonders where they think they're going to find enough tourists to fill a hundred-story hotel, even if they do ever finish it.
  
  (Lonely Planet's writeup of the country is interestingly clever, particularly the way it manages to put excessive positive spin on things and yet still not make the country sound like an even remotely interesting tourist destination. The only landmark attraction they specifically mention is a mountain, which they call "one of the most stunning sights in North Korea", although they do also claim that the capital city has "a few sites worth visiting".)
  
  Nobody in the Dilbert comic strip has ever approached North Korea's level of incompetence.
  
  --
  Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Dear Leader's Satellite is So Advanced... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-12 12:42 · Score: 5, Funny

...it can cover multiple orbital trajectories while imperialist pig Yankee capitalist satellites are only capable of a single orbit.
hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-12 12:43 · Score: 5, Interesting

US launches secret space drone... NK satellite suddenly goes into an uncontrolled descent.
1 + 1 = ...
How can this be? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-12 12:44 · Score: 5, Interesting

If you're in orbit, you're in orbit. If your orbit is too low then it's a decaying orbit but "tumbling out of control" is a bit of hyperbole from the press. It might be harder to predict the re-entry if the satellite is spinning and has no attitude control; maybe that's what they mean. I suppose it's possible that it could strike that atmosphere and bounce before re-entering, but will it bounce high enough to impact something in LEO? Details please. I bet this is a tempest in a teapot; not that I condone NK's actions or think they're particularly smart.
1. Re:How can this be? by tragedy · 2012-12-12 12:58 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  "tumbling out of control" is a bit of hyperbole from the press
  I would have to say "the greatest danger is the threat of it colliding with another satellite, adding to the growing debris field around the earth" is another fine example of that hyperbole. I mean, it's probably technically true. The odds may be infinitesimal, but still higher than the odds of any other danger.
2. Re:How can this be? by edjs · 2012-12-12 13:36 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  The article is quoting "US officials" when describing it as tumbling. If the satellite is spinning around more than one axis, then tumbling is the appropriate description, and is strong evidence that it is not under control.
3. Re:How can this be? by n3r0.m4dski11z · 2012-12-12 16:39 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  [you posit that its hyperbolic to say there is a risk of satellite collisions] "I mean, it's probably technically true The odds may be infinitesimal, but still higher than the odds of any other danger."
  You must not have seen space junk 3d
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUZO5pW7-5U
  http://www.space.com/14132-space-junk-3d-film-orbital-debris.html
  Because in it, they discuss at length, and 3d model, the 2009 collision of Iridium 33 and Kosmos-2251. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_satellite_collision ) which most certainly did occur recently and definitely in our lifetimes.
  Their thesis was that it will become more and more of a problem unless people start taking it seriously and not just writing it off as a one time fluke, as you are.
  
  --
  -
4. Re:How can this be? by SplashMyBandit · 2012-12-12 20:50 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Interesting. I heard that a Westerner who went through Pyongyang was surprised to see US flags *everywhere*. You see, the food aid extorted from the US comes in large sacks that have US flags stamped on them. When the food is used the sacks get re-purposed for lots of things, like makeshift materials (eg, awnings, window blinds etc). Hence, the North Korean certainly understand where the food is coming from. The official line might be continuous revolution and the evil West, but I doubt the West is hated more than their government (if it wasn't for ruthless armed guards the people would flee - that speaks volumes about what the people think about their 'Workers Paradise').
Re:It may not be stupidity by icebike · 2012-12-12 12:56 · Score: 5, Insightful

Or, it was designed to be a simple parabolic missile, but NK test firing a missile is banned by the UN, so they pack in enough fuel to get to orbit, any kind of orbit, and there was never a plan to make it a stable orbit nor were there thursters on board to do so. In other words, a missile test disguised as a orbital launch.

--
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Re:Start betting on where it'll land? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-12 13:06 · Score: 5, Funny

I hope it lands back in North Korea so its citizens can get some return on their investment.
What goes around, comes around by BeerCat · 2012-12-12 13:23 · Score: 5, Interesting

In the original space race, when the Soviets launched a satellite, it was seen in the west as a proxy for an ICBM - the (correct) theory being, that a nation firing a sub-orbital rocket was "interesting", while a nation launching an orbital craft meant they could, potentially, hit "anywhere" (subject to orbital inclination and other similar factors)
Now that the Soviet Union has fallen, to be replaced by "friendly" (yeah, right) Russia, other nations can launch satellites with impunity (China, India etc). Most of them are, if not "friendly" to the west, are at least "not complete and utter fruitbats" (that's a technical term BTW).
North Korea (DPRK), though, is still transitioning from the "complete and utter fruitbat" of Kim Jong-Il to Kim Jong-Un, so that, at this stage, it is hard to say whether the new Dear Leader's plans for satellites are peaceful or not.
Assumption 1: it is peaceful, so an out of control satellite is, as USA, Russia and several others have found out, merely an expensive mistake
Assumption 2: it is deliberately provocative, (we launch a satellite, so an ICBM is easier), so an out of control satellite is... well what, exactly?
Let's not forget that part of DPRK's posturing is directed inwards - their recent "nuclear accident" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryanggang_explosion) - to quote wiki "No neighboring nations have claimed any detection of radioactive isotopes characteristic of a nuclear explosion.", even though their news media hinted it as such, means that even an unsuccessful satellite will still be seen as a "we are a major power" - when broadcast to those in DPRK
So... where from here? DPRK joins the space race. That is still a concern. Does it matter that the satellite failed? Only if it was intended to be "just a satellite" If it was a "proof of concept" for an ICBM, then a wonky orbit is still an orbit

--
"She's furniture with a pulse"
1. Re:What goes around, comes around by Strider- · 2012-12-12 17:09 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Whatever it is, it's not a weather satellite. Those are put into geosynchronous or geostationary orbits (west to east with slight inclination or directly over the equator with zero inclination), so they'll have the same view of the Earth all the time. e.g. If India launches a weather satellite, they want it hanging over India 24/7 so, y'know, it'll show them pictures of the weather over India all the time. Because geosynchronous orbits are so much higher (42,000 km), they require a lot more energy than low earth orbit (150-300 km).
  Actually, no. Much of the weather observations are done from polar orbiting satellites in low orbit. This allows them to have a much more detailed view of the earth and its weather systems then if you're geo-stationary. To put it in perspective, from geo-synchronous orbit, the earth is a sphere about 17 degrees wide. This is roughly the size of a basketball held out at arm's length. Sure you can see large scale weather patterns (Hurricanes and so forth) but it doesn't tell you about much about local conditions. This is where NOAA's POES satellites, as well as the ones from other nations are intended for. They are put into exactly the same type of sun-synchronous orbit as the NK launch.
  
  --
  ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
Re:So what does the world do about it? by Spy+Handler · 2012-12-12 13:56 · Score: 5, Funny

And, of course, you sound so confident you can win (protip: You didn't win last time).
We didn't have Chuck Norris last time.
Re:It may not be stupidity by mug+funky · 2012-12-12 15:20 · Score: 5, Funny

do you have any idea how f'ing busy I am, Hans Brix??