Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Missile Test Creates Huge Expanding Halo of Light Over Hawaii

Posted by samzenpus on from the looks-like-progress dept.

The Bad Astronomer writes "A Minuteman III missile launch from California early Wednesday morning created a weird, expanding halo of light seen from the CFHT observatory on Hawaii's Mauna Kea. The third stage of the missile has ports that open and dump fuel into the near-vacuum. This cloud expands rapidly as a spherical shell, shock-exciting the air molecules and causing them to glow, creating the bizarre effect."

59 of 93 comments (clear)

  1. Is this how they are covering up airbursts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought they outlawed above ground nuclear testing decades ago. This is a pretty obvious cover up of a small nuke and I doubt this would fool anyone.

    1. Re:Is this how they are covering up airbursts? by Kreigaffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can't cover up an atmospheric nuke, you can hardly even cover up an underground one. people will find out. we're good at spotting the radiation and fallout and unique shockwave if it's underground.

      the rest of the world wouldn't agree to stay quiet about things

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    2. Re:Is this how they are covering up airbursts? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      The Experience Music Project? Yeah, people definitely notice - that building is pretty darn weird...

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Is this how they are covering up airbursts? by jacknifetoaswan · · Score: 1

      Missile defense test targets are launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai, not from Vandenberg. Vandenberg is used for traditional missile systems testing, with a dummy warhead, and no THAAD/Aegis/GMD defensive testing. Also, when missile defense targets are launched, they don't use Minuteman III missiles, as they make up the current land-based nuclear deterrent force, they use mocked up missiles or decommissioned separating missiles that were part of the land-based force in the past.

    4. Re:Is this how they are covering up airbursts? by artao · · Score: 2

      This was not a nuke. The missle was unarmed. It was a flight and systems test. One thing the article fails to point out is the the fuel in the third stage is hypergolic. It is two parts, monomethylhydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide, which ignite upon contact. SO!! One can only assume that upon a fuel dump, there would be ignition which, it seems to me, would fully and totally explain this expanding cloud of glow.

  2. Yet Another Alien Visit? by jarich · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've seen Stargate. I know this is just another lame government cover up of an alien visitation. Better check on your cows!!

    --
    Agile Artisans
    1. Re:Yet Another Alien Visit? by JWSmythe · · Score: 2

          It's ok, they were just jumping a meteor through the Earth... again...

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    2. Re:Yet Another Alien Visit? by OhANameWhatName · · Score: 3, Funny

      I know this is just another lame government cover up

      Don't be silly. This was the testing of a 50 year old missile platform causing a previously unseen anomoly thousands of miles from the launch site of said missile.

    3. Re:Yet Another Alien Visit? by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      I've seen Stargate. I know this is just another lame government cover up of an alien visitation. Better check on your cows!!

      It is Valence-Time Day for space faring races. Your similar, but mangled, Valentines' day has you lopping off the reproductive parts of plants, our bonding ceremony is at the molecular level, the cow genitals are just party favors.

    4. Re:Yet Another Alien Visit? by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      SG1 will save us...

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    5. Re:Yet Another Alien Visit? by fishybell · · Score: 1

      I know this is just another lame government cover up

      Don't be silly. This was the testing of a 50 year old missile platform causing a previously unseen anomoly thousands of miles from the launch site of said missile.

      Yes, but with really intense music!

      --
      ><));>
  3. Launch Rescheduled from Before? by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 4, Informative

    Any bets that this is the same exercise as the launch we didn't do back in April? We wouldn't want to have North Korea have a hissy fit or anything.

    Cheers,
    Dave

    --
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
    Ben
    1. Re:Launch Rescheduled from Before? by Solandri · · Score: 2

      Yes, that's the one. While it originated at Vandenberg, technically it wasn't launched from Vandenberg. It was launched from a modified L-1011 in mid-flight.

      SpaceX has its first west coast launch scheduled for July 9, launching a Canadian communications and research satellite from Vandenberg. That's been pushed back from April, then June, to its current July 9 date. Word is it may slip again to July 20. Elon Musk has said they're going to try to execute a powered soft landing of the first stage into the ocean so they can recover it and reuse it.

      After that is an NRO spy satellite currently scheduled to go up on Aug 28 on a Delta IV Heavy, which with the retirement of the Shuttles is now the biggest rocket in service in the U.S.

    2. Re:Launch Rescheduled from Before? by Solandri · · Score: 2

      Doh, mixed up the Minuteman with the Pegasus. My apologies. The Pegasus is the one launched from the L-1011, and there's one scheduled for late June.

    3. Re:Launch Rescheduled from Before? by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 1

      There was some testing done back in I think the '80s to drop launch a Minuteman from a C5A. This was back when there was the huge debate over what was then called the MX and how to base it so that the Soviets couldn't take it out with a first strike, One idea was to have nuclear armed missiles loaded on airplanes flying around so there was no possibility of a first strike. Kind of an extension of "Looking Glass" to include the weapons, too.

      Cheers,
      Dave

      --
      They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
      Ben
  4. Anyone wanna bet? by Smerta · · Score: 5, Funny

    North Korea's about to follow. They've got their best Photoshop team on the job right now!

    1. Re:Anyone wanna bet? by siddesu · · Score: 1

      Sadly, they are just following the example set by the big boys and don't need a stinking Photoshop. I'm only hoping they won't follow that other bad example the big boys set in August of 1945.

  5. Test? by rossdee · · Score: 1

    Why do they need to test a Minuteman III ?

    Its not a new weapon, they have been operational for around over 40 years

    1. Re:Test? by CajunArson · · Score: 2

      "Its not a new weapon, they have been operational for around over 40 years."

      Why do soldiers need to fire rifles? They aren't new weapons, they have been operational for decades.

      --
      AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
    2. Re:Test? by NouberNou · · Score: 5, Informative

      You answered your own question. These missiles have been active for 40 years. They need to be tested to make sure they work. They go out to the missile fields and they pick a missile at random, pull it out of the silo, remove the warheads, fly it over to Vandy, install instrumentation and dummy warheads, take the crew from the field it was in and fire it down range, making sure everything works right still.

      This is also one of the very few times that a crew actually gets to launch a live missile, so its an exciting exercise for them as well, so much so that the exercises are called "Glory Trip".

      Anyway, pretty much everyone tests their stockpile of ICBMs and SLBMs to make sure they are working, otherwise deterrence starts to lose some of its credibility.

      Furthermore, and a little dark, but think about how amazing it'd look to be in north central Canada if WW3 breaks out on a clear night and you have hundreds of these missiles going down range... The end of the world would be somewhat pretty.

    3. Re:Test? by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      The end of the world would be somewhat pretty.

      ...to the cockroaches and our new ape overlords.

    4. Re:Test? by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

      Why do soldiers need to fire rifles? They aren't new weapons, they have been operational for decades.

      The rifles might have been around for decades but the soldiers have not; even if they had humans need practice to remain skilled.

    5. Re:Test? by EmagGeek · · Score: 2

      I find it a little morbid that this would be considered a "glory" trip, when there really is no glory in wiping out millions of innocent civilians with nuclear weapons.

    6. Re:Test? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wooosh.

    7. Re:Test? by gatkinso · · Score: 2

      What makes you think they were testing the missile? They could be testing ABM radar, satellite launch detection sensors, penetration aids... any number of things.

      Usually however they combine tests whenever possible especially in this age of sequestration.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    8. Re:Test? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      So they can track the performance and reliability of a forty year old weapon system and make statistical projections about the performance and reliability of the fleet as a whole.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    9. Re: Test? by hAckz0r · · Score: 1

      The MM III is not the test, its the target most likely. Somewhere, where it was headed, was an even bigger "show to see", just not anywhere near any telescopes you might hear reports from. If I'm right you might read something about it on the MDA website.

    10. Re:Test? by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      There is also no glory in PRETENDING to wipe out millions of innocent civilians with nuclear weapons.

  6. Cue conspiracies by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cue conspiracy theories about alien technology and/or chemtrails in 3... 2... 1...

    --
    while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    1. Re:Cue conspiracies by cold+fjord · · Score: 2

      0...: Chemspheres - a new and far more sinister threat.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  7. Dump Fuel? by Roachie · · Score: 2

    Its a solid rocket.

    --
    This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.
    1. Re:Dump Fuel? by twisted_pare · · Score: 3, Informative

      RTFM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman "Minuteman-III introduced in the post-boost stage (“bus”) an additional liquid-fuel propulsion system rocket engine (PSRE) that is used to slightly adjust the trajectory."

      --
      HTFU
    2. Re:Dump Fuel? by LWATCDR · · Score: 2

      The key to making a solid fueled ballistic missile is the ability to turn it off. They do that by blowing out vents on the side of motor to vent the exhaust. AKA dumping the fuel.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:Dump Fuel? by kermidge · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I caught that as well.

      Third stage, at least, has dump ports. At precise time according to flight plan, charges open vents in side of can, venting combustion gases and this abruptly ends continued boost. (Yah, I know that first stage is called boost phase, so sue me.)

      Guy who thought it was fuel being dumped maybe thinks solid-fuel rockets burn from one end to the other. Obviously he doesn't understand just what solid fuel means. He was certainly too lazy to look it up (that or had a five minute deadline and little prior knowledge of rockets).

    4. Re:Dump Fuel? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      The bus is something completely different. You need the bus to guide the multiple individual RVs. This is about killing the third stage thrust.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    5. Re:Dump Fuel? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      But they're not actually "dumping the fuel". What they're doing is stopping the combustion process by means of an explosive decompression. It's more like stopping a campfire by opening doors into space, rather than venting a tank. The wood pile stays inside, it just stops burning. (And if the solid fuel only continues burning at a reduced rate, it can't generate any thrust anyway because there's little pressure in the chamber, and no de Laval nozzle attached to it anymore to turn it into a supersonic stream.)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re:Dump Fuel? by budgenator · · Score: 2

      I'm sure it doesn't work that way,
      1 solid rocket motor fuel burns in a vacuum as well as in an atmosphere, rocket motor fuel has an oxidiser incorporated into the mixture,
        2 pressure on the forward bulkhead from the combustion and no aft bulkhead would still produce thrust due to delta pressure, just not optimum thrust.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    7. Re:Dump Fuel? by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      The Minuteman III has ports in the third stage that can be blown to vent the motor case, slowing or stopping the burning of the grain, and essentially shutting down[1] the motor. It's this vented gas ("dumped fuel") that produced the halo. When the ports are blown the motor decelerates rapidly, so they use this to their advantage by simultaneously separating the bus, thus ensuring the third stage will be clear as the bus maneuvers to start releasing warheads.

      This used to be a fairly common method of controlling the final velocity of solid fueled ballistic missiles. It was used by; MM-I, MM-II, MM-II, Peacekeeper, Polaris A-1 and A-2, Poseidon C-3, ASROC, and SUBROC. (There may be more, those are just the ones I know about.) Trident -I and -II use GEMS (Generalized Energy Management Steering) to adjust the missiles trajectory so that at burnout it's at the desired final velocity.

      [1] Yes Virginia, you can (contrary to what "everyone knows") essentially shut down a solid rocket motor - but it's a very violent event. A tandem staged missile can just leave the decelerating stage in it's wake, but the Shuttle cannot. Whether they simply blew the connections to the ET (which also exposes the orbiter to the sandblast of the SRB's exhaust), or blew ports in the SRB casing, the transient forces would turn the stack into confetti. The orbiter would be tossed into the airstream and be torn apart. (This is what happened to Challenger when the ET broke up after the RH SRB came loose and crashed into it. The subsequent explosion, while very impressive to the naked eye, was actually very low pressure and low energy and played very little part in destroying the orbiter.) The looked into using an Orbiter mounted solid fueled escape motor to power away from the stack under thrust and control, but it turned out to be way too heavy. (Even if they traded fuel in the ET for the solid fuel in the escape motor and used it for part of the final kick into orbit.)

    8. Re:Dump Fuel? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      actually it does work that way. The decompression is so fast that it puts out the fuel.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    9. Re:Dump Fuel? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      True I was giving the quick explanation of what they mean.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  8. I saw one of these by rleamon · · Score: 5, Informative

    In LA in the late 80s. I thought aliens were invading. The sun had set but still illuminated the upper atmosphere, where a strangely large greenish globe of glowing gas gently expanded while a small bright object traveled remarkably slowly through its center. People had stopped and were watching as alertly as I was -- seriously, it was one of those slightly spine-tingling moments when you believe something impossible and possibly very bad might be happening... The next day the newspaper had a short piece about a launch from Vandenberg causing it. Or so they say...

    1. Re:I saw one of these by Solandri · · Score: 4, Informative

      Unlike Cape Canaveral which launches into an equatorial orbit to the east, Vandenberg launches into polar orbits to the south, and tests to the Marshall Islands to the west. That means the vapor trail is in prime position to be backlit by sunlight in the upper atmosphere just after sunset, making for very dramatic sights and photos as you describe. If the timing is right, on a clear day it's visible from most of Southern California. A friend of mine has a spectacular photo he took of such a launch from Joshua Tree, which is about 250 miles away.

    2. Re:I saw one of these by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      In LA in the late 80s. I thought aliens were invading.

      You know, had you actually watched Star Trek VI and the new episodes of Star Wars by the time you saw that, you would have known that an alien explosion would have made a 2D shockwave and not a spherical one. If nothing else, we can at least thank Lucas for fixing this bit of general education.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:I saw one of these by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Unlike Cape Canaveral which launches into an equatorial orbit to the east

      Are you sure about that? Unless we're talking about GTO launches, an equatorial orbit is dfficult to reach from Cape Canaveral since you're actually not on the equator.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:I saw one of these by Molochi · · Score: 1

      Ditto in 1988 (IIRC). From a Florida launch. I was driving north of Atlanta though, so it looked like what could be an airburst over the city or some kind of Tunguska bang. It was definitely an Oh Shit hour and had me checking the radio news channels, which I figured would go down if there was an EMP or at least say something about it.

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    5. Re:I saw one of these by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure he was talking about an orbit with a low inclination in general, not one that was exactly zero. In any case, it does tend to launch to the east. If you wanted to launch from the east coast into a polar orbit it would probably be cheaper to do it at a more northern facility like Wallops Island.

  9. Directed by J.J. Abrams by Mr.+Chow · · Score: 4, Funny

    The lens flare does not lie!

  10. Not fuel, and not a Minuteman [CONSPIRACY!!!!] by EmagGeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's chemtrails. It's your government putting mind control chemicals into the atmosphere, and rainbows in your sprinklers.

    Hah...

    1. Re:Not fuel, and not a Minuteman [CONSPIRACY!!!!] by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      "That the simulant bacteria caused these infections and death has never been conclusively established. Nevin's son and grandson lost a lawsuit that they brought against the government between 1981 and 1983."

      I'm sure a lot of them remember being abducted and probed by aliens, too.

  11. I found it ironic... by kcmastrpc · · Score: 1

    This story being right above "3d printers for peace".

  12. Absolutely agreed by waspleg · · Score: 1

    I was thinking the same thing. America is the modern Rome, for a few more years maybe, and if I had had the mod points they would have been yours.

  13. Re:Instead of watching blinking lights... by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

    Did someone forget their meds again?

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  14. ...and here's the Russian version (over Norway) by hazeii · · Score: 1

    Something much weirder was seen over Norway when a Russian launch went wrong.

    --
    All your ghosts are just false positives.
  15. Sorry by Cinnaman · · Score: 1

    ...but this was not worth a Slashdot story.

  16. Re:Missle fuel dumps or staging, common phenom by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2

    The following is from Ted Molczan, an expert on satellites and launches and a major contributor to the seesat-l list. There's a good change of seeing a fuel dump from a Delta 4 medium if you're in the right place at the right time.

    WGS 5 is scheduled for launch from Cape Canaveral on a Delta 4 Medium+(5,4) in about 11 hours, on 2013 May 24, between 00:27 and 00:57 UTC.
    http://www.spaceflightnow.com/delta/d362/status.html
    I offer the following rough TLE of the orbit after the final burn of the 2nd stage, assuming launch at window-open:
    SECO-2 440 X 66991 km
    1 78901U 13144.04069444 .00000000 00000-0 00000-0 0 02
    2 78901 24.0048 67.6288 8299446 177.8402 1.4113 1.08160032 04
    Following spacecraft separation, observers within range should look for the following 2nd stage events (times
    approximate):
            T+ UTC
    00:45:00 01:12:00 CCAM Start (Collision and Contamination Avoidance Manoeuvre)
    00:47:20 01:14:20 CCAM End
    00:54:41 01:21:41 H2 Depletion End
    00:56:40 01:23:40 O2 Depletion End
    01:18:33 01:45:33 N2H4 depletion End

    The fuel dump could produce a spectacular comet-like phenomenon, similar to that of WGS 4, imaged last year despite
    challenging conditions by Willie Koorts: http://satobs.org/seesat/Jan-2012/0270.html

    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  17. You can see one yourself by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

    The following is from Ted Molczan, an expert on satellites and launches and a major contributor to the seesat-l list. There's a good change of seeing a fuel dump from a Delta 4 medium if you're in the right place at the right time.

    WGS 5 is scheduled for launch from Cape Canaveral on a Delta 4 Medium+(5,4) in about 11 hours, on 2013 May 24, between 00:27 and 00:57 UTC.
    http://www.spaceflightnow.com/delta/d362/status.html
    I offer the following rough TLE of the orbit after the final burn of the 2nd stage, assuming launch at window-open:
    SECO-2 440 X 66991 km
    1 78901U 13144.04069444 .00000000 00000-0 00000-0 0 02
    2 78901 24.0048 67.6288 8299446 177.8402 1.4113 1.08160032 04
    Following spacecraft separation, observers within range should look for the following 2nd stage events (times
    approximate):
            T+ UTC
    00:45:00 01:12:00 CCAM Start (Collision and Contamination Avoidance Manoeuvre)
    00:47:20 01:14:20 CCAM End
    00:54:41 01:21:41 H2 Depletion End
    00:56:40 01:23:40 O2 Depletion End
    01:18:33 01:45:33 N2H4 depletion End

    The fuel dump could produce a spectacular comet-like phenomenon, similar to that of WGS 4, imaged last year despite
    challenging conditions by Willie Koorts: http://satobs.org/seesat/Jan-2012/0270.html

    --
    Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  18. What is this guys other hobbies by rhade · · Score: 1

    That his response to this glint of light is 'How cool is that?'.
    seriously, ive had more interesting patterns in the foam of a mcdonalds cappucino

    --
    http://www.awfullybigmoustache.com
  19. Re:Get it right! by artao · · Score: 1

    So it's NOT releasing unused monomethylhydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide into the upper atmosphere? .. My thoughts was that this glow could be caused by the combustion of the released fuel, being hypergolic and all.

  20. Don't Look Into The Light by Sethmiesters · · Score: 1

    They've woken up God now and she's pissed.