Bella

gamercube,

.........................Get back on topic and stop talking like your in 5th grade!
We all know that China posesses nuclear weapons...........
This thread is about how the U.S. shot down a satellite, not who can nuke who!

Officer of Engineers

For the record, the current assessment, supported by Chinese statements, is that they have 200 nukes - all stored away from their delivery vehicles.

__________________
Chimo

xinhui

Got reference to back it up?

Canmoore

Do not wet your panties just yet... the equipment and software needed to kill this satellite was retrofitted to a Cruiser, and was intended for this one time use only.

The US navy has no inventory of navy based anti-satellite ships or equipment.. this was a one time event, the US navy cannot operate any stand alone anti-satellite warfare...

still pretty cool though!!!

Officer of Engineers

Canmoore,

Who are you referring to? Just an FYI, Xinhui, one of my very best friends, used to work for Lockheed Martin ... and is without a doubt the most prolific internet researcher on the PLA.

... and he's a IT whiz ...

Plus he has 2 girls and a wife who paints every two months

... so experience wise, he has it way, way over you.

Canmoore

I was referring to the title of the thread.. No one in particular. I was watching a U.S. General speak about this operation, he noted that this was a one time deal. And that the military lacks any naval based anti-satellite equipment or vessels in its inventory.

I think it was a response to a question, about whether or not the military has the active capability to kill satellites at will.

erik

You sure? I thought 3 Aegis ships were on alert to shoot it down.

Also they used the SM-3 ABM missile, which had it's software modified for its sensors to recognize the satellite is the target.

I'm not sure if just the SM-3's on the ship at the time were modified just once, or if it is a permanent modification.

RustyBattleship

Sounds like a chicken farm here clucking this and that and maybe and can you prove that and if there were back ups or not.

Pluck, pluck, pluck, PLAAAWK.

Fact:
A very large satellite was falling out of orbit and it's place of landfall could not be calculated.

Fact:
It was a polar orbit satellite and if left to continue on past the Pacific Ocean it may come down in some populated area (like my living room for example - or your bathroom - I don't know if my Allstate home owners policy covers falling satellites or not)

Fact:
A US Navy ship was tasked to shoot down that satellite while it was still over the ocean.

Fact:
The Satellite was doing 17,000 miles per hour.

Fact:
The Satellite was 130 miles up.

Fact:
One Navy ship fired one SM-3 at the satellite (must have been one hell of lead of Kentucky windage).

Fact:
BULLSEYE. One shot, dead center.

So what's there to cackle about. Who cares who tried what, when, how many times, etc.? Let's look at what we just did where EVERYTHING went right.

WELL DONE NAVY.

__________________
Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

dalem

Damn straight.

-dale

beansprout

Its pretty hypocritcal of how the U.S.A tolerates against China. When the chinese shot down one of its weather satelites, the U.S was pretty alarmed when the chinese shot down its own satellites.

And when the U.S shot down "its" own satellite the response of the U.S was stated as "trying to protect earth from toxic gases"

Hypocritcal much? despite the U.S actions?

__________________
He conquers who endures - Persius

lwarmonger

The Chinese were deliberately testing ASAT capabilities. I'm sure we could arrange to have a different satellite full of toxic fuel land in your neighborhood though.

beansprout

Well testing asat capabilities is another matter....the chinese response was that it wanted to shoot down its "aging weather satellite". Just like the U.S said, it wanted to "shoot down its aging spy satellite" because toxic fumes were comming out of the satellite.

Well...heh...The chinese could of said this aswell, but would of came under scrutiny and critical response from the international community for not maintaining safety checks etc.

Does the public really trust this report? many Chinese Australians people in Sydney are arguing its quite hypocritcal of the U.S and quite frankly doesn't believe what the U.S says.....

Bluesman

We refer to those people as 'dupes'.

__________________
"The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it, and if one finds the prospect of a long war intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the possibility of victory."
- George Orwell

Elbmek

Can you please shoot down the Sky satellites, I am sick and tired of hearing bloody adverts for loans; from loan shoarks, like Ocean Finance!!

__________________
Never lie, then you have nothing to try and remember.

BadKharma

I would have to agree with RustyBattleship. I dont even want to try to figure out that kind of Kentucky windage.