spy satellite

[sn-e3]

It looks like the US Navy will get a chance to shoot down the spy satellite thats running out of juice. I hope it works the whole world will be watching. I got the story from yahoo news.

[82Rigger]

This sounds like a plan...IF they can blow it into small enough pieces that it all
burns up on the way in...including that fuel tank.

[revwardoc]

It'll make a hell of good meteor-like shower. Hope they do it at night.

[revwardoc]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23172469

Heading off a toxic iceberg from space
Concern about hydrazine fuel leads to Pentagon’s satellite intercept plan

HOUSTON - Less than a month ago, White House officials said a falling spy satellite would likely pose little threat to humans — but on Thursday, the Pentagon said President Bush himself approved an unorthodox plan to destroy the satellite with a missile strike.

What could warrant such a change of heart? It's the realization that the spacecraft could be bringing a toxic iceberg back down to Earth.

Aboard the 2.5-ton derelict satellite, designated "USA-193," is a fuel tank containing half a ton of hydrazine. Since the satellite went dead within hours after launch 14 months ago, the fuel has not been depleted by normal rocket maneuvers.

Hydrazine is a nasty chemical that could poison the area where it is released. Until recently, U.S. officials were saying that the tank would be crushed as the satellite fell through the atmosphere, sometime in early March. If that were the case, the toxic hydrazine would almost certainly be burned off and safely dispersed during the fiery fall.

NASA Administrator Michael Griffin sketched out a different scenario, however, during Thursday's news conference with Gen. James Cartwright, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Griffin said NASA experts calculated that the hydrazine was frozen solid due to the satellite’s yearlong drift through the cold of space. The tank, with its half-ton ice core of hydrazine, would thus become one of the most perfect re-entry vehicles ever to fall back to Earth.

Griffin explained that the contents of the tank could turn to slush during the fall, but would very likely survive and leak toxic gas over the crash site. Another expert told msnbc.com privately that the solid ice would provide structural support against the 20 to 25 G’s of deceleration experienced by the satellite during re-entry.

Safety first?
Pentagon officials said it was that safety concern, rather than the intention to test a potential anti-satellite weapon, which led them to develop the plan for a missile intercept. They hope the impact of the warhead on a modified Standard Missile-3, or SM-3, will shatter the satellite — and particularly the spherical hydrazine tank. The first shot could occur as early as next week, after the space shuttle Atlantis' return from its mission to the international space station.

Would a direct hit be required? Experts on space debris told msnbc.com that even a glancing blow would likely be enough. The force of a missile hitting an orbiting object is much more violent than the force of a bullet striking a target, or even an anti-aircraft missile hitting an airplane. In the space case, the tremendous speed of the impact carries so much kinetic energy that both vehicles literally explode due to the hypersonic shock waves sweeping through their structures.

If the missile strike leads to such a disintegration, sharp observers should be able to spot the ice fragments from the fuel tank. As the fragments evaporate in direct sunlight, they could create mini-comets visible from Earth’s surface, lasting for hours before dispersing.

Pentagon officials said the intercept would occur within range of military optical and radar sensors. Their goal would be to confirm the existence of dispersed hydrazine in the debris. If the sensors don't show the fuel dispersing, missile operators would target the fragment judged most likely to be the still-surviving fuel tank. A second shot could occur within a day or two of the first.

Giving the missiles a boost
Last week's orbital readings indicated that the satellite was circling Earth at an altitude between 160 and 168 miles (255 and 268 kilometers) and descending at an increasing rate, currently about six-tenths of a mile (1 kilometer) per day. Gen. Cartwright said the intercept would be attempted when the satellite descended to about 150 miles (240 kilometers).

The SM-3 has typically been used for testing the Pentagon's missile defense system, and reaches a nominal maximum altitude of just 100 miles (160 kilometers). For the satellite intercept, three missiles — one each on three different AEGIS-class Navy cruisers — will be modified to reach the higher altitude.

[David]

In this image provided by the US Navy a Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) is launched from Pearl Harbor-based guided-missile cruiser USS Lake Erie (CG 70) to intercept a threat representative target as part of a Missile Defense Agency test of the sea-based capability under development on Nov. 6, 2007. Taking a page from Hollywood science fiction, the Pentagon said Thursday Feb. 14, 2008 it will try to shoot down a dying, bus-size U.S. spy satellite loaded with toxic fuel on a collision course with the Earth using a SM-3 missile. The military hopes to smash the satellite as soon as next week — just before it enters Earth's atmosphere — with a single missile fired from a Navy cruiser in the northern Pacific Ocean. Software associated with the SM-3 has been modified to enhance the chances of the missile's sensors recognizing that the satellite is its target.

[DeadlyDaring]

Hydrazine would be the best and only real reason to shoot it down, is !!!!!!

From the Wikipedia Dictionary
“““Hydrazine was first used as a rocket fuel during World War II for the Messerschmitt Me 163B (the first rocket-powered fighter plane), under the name B-Stoff (hydrazinehydrate). If mixed with methanol (M-Stoff) and water it is called C-Stoff. Hydrazine is also used as a low-power monopropellant for the maneuvering thrusters of spacecraft, and the Space Shuttle's Auxiliary Power Units. In addition, monopropellant hydrazine-fueled rocket engines are often used in terminal descent of spacecraft. A collection of such engines was used in both Viking landers as well as the Phoenix lander launched in August 2007.”””

The safety issue…
Hydrazine is highly toxic and dangerously unstable, especially in the anhydrous form. Symptoms of acute exposure to high levels of hydrazine in humans may include irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat, dizziness, headache, nausea, pulmonary edema, seizures, coma, and it can also damage the liver, kidneys, and central nervous system. The liquid is corrosive and may produce dermatitis from skin contact in humans and animals. Effects to the lungs, liver, spleen, and thyroid have been reported in animals chronically exposed to hydrazine via inhalation. Increased incidences of lung, nasal cavity, and liver tumors have been observed in rodents exposed to hydrazine

Hydrazine really isn’t very stable… just heat it to see what happens.

Overheating the hydrazine tank will most likely cause thermal breakdown of some of the liquid into hydrogen and nitrogen gas, which will then rupture the tank. Any remaining liquid would rapidly re-act with the metals of the satellite and cause some intense burning, releasing more hydrogen and nitrogen gases. You will not get anything poisonous because the re-entry heat will break it down too fast. Propellants don’t reach the ground anyway

But… Onboard is the latest Top secret spying device equiptment… The Camera… has a VERY SPECIAL PHOTO LENS and the US does not want it getting into the wrong hands

In concluding…
THE SPY SATELITE IS TO BE SHOT DOWN OVER IRELAND
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h...VIW2gD8UR1JKG0

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...pled-satellite


In the mean time, mind your heads

[locksly]

This sounds like a plan...the whole world will be watching.

Star Wars missle defence is important to stop Arab missle attack.
Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) is being developed as part of the US Navy’s sea-based ballistic missile defense system and will provide theater-wide defense against medium and long range ballistic missiles. In 1992, the Terrier LEAP (Lightweight Exo-Atmospheric Projectile) demonstration program culminated in four flight tests and demonstrated the feasibility of theater-wide ballistic missile defense. This program evolved into today’s SM-3 development program which is based on the SM-2 Block IV airframe and propulsion stack, but incorporates a Third Stage Rocket Motor, a GPS/INS Guidance Section and the SM-3 Kinetic Warhead.
The United States Navy and the Missile Defense Agency are developing Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) as part of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System that will provide allied forces and U.S. protection from short to intermediate range ballistic missiles. The SM-3 Kinetic Warhead (KW) is designed to intercept an incoming ballistic missile outside the earth’s atmosphere. SM-3 is under development by Raytheon at its Missile Systems business unit in Tucson, Arizona.

Configuration
The Aegis BMDS builds upon the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization/Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (SDIO/ BMDO) investment in Lightweight ExoAtmospheric Projectile (LEAP) technology and the Navy’s Aegis weapon system including Standard Missile and MK41 Vertical Launching System currently deployed on many U.S. Navy and international surface combatants.

The SM-3 KW is a highly modular, compact, space tested kinetic warhead designed to defend against short to intermediate range ballistic missile attacks. Raytheon has engineered two prior generations of LEAP designs starting in 1985 under contracts with SDIO and BMDO. This third generation LEAP design integrates the teamed experience of Raytheon and Boeing in KW designs and Alliant Techsystems’ expertise in Solid Divert and Attitude Control. The SM-3 KW design features a large aperture wide field of view long wave infrared seeker that provides acquisition ranges greater than 300 km against typical ballistic missile threats. Seeker pointing and intercept guidance are supported by a production IFOG Inertial Measurement Unit and wooden round simplicity of the SDACS propulsion providing over 2 miles of terminal divert capability. The KW includes a fully encrypted data downlink capability for full engineering evaluation of KW performance and to support rapid kill assessment.

The SM-3 evolves from the proven SM-2 Block IV design. SM-3 uses the same booster and dual thrust rocket motor as the Block IV missile for the first and second stages and the same steering control section and midcourse missile guidance for maneuvering in the atmosphere. To support the extended range of an exo-atmospheric intercept, additional missile thrust is provided in a new third stage for the SM-3 missile, containing a dual pulse rocket motor for the early exo-atmospheric phase of flight and a Lightweight Exo-Atmospheric Projectile (LEAP) Kinetic Warhead (KW) for the intercept phase. Upon second stage separation, the first pulse burn of the Third Stage Rocket Motor (TSRM) provides the axial thrust to maintain the missile’s trajectory into the exo-atmosphere. Upon entering the exo-atmosphere, the third stage coasts. The TSRM’s attitude control system maneuvers the third stage to eject the nosecone, exposing the KW’s Infrared (IR) seeker. If the third stage requires a course correction for an intercept, the rocket motor begins the second pulse burn. Upon completion of the second pulse burn, the IR seeker is calibrated and the KW ejects. The KW possesses its own attitude control system and guidance commands are acted upon by a solid divert propulsion system. The IR seeker acquires the target. Tracking information is continuously transmitted to the guidance assembly which controls the divert propulsion system.

Discrimination algorithms enable defense systems to compare objects in a target scene to determine which to intercept. Increasingly complex threats with separated target elements, countermeasures, and debris, require advanced signal processing and discrimination algorithms to identify object features needed to provide robust target selection. SM-3 has flown and demonstrated fundamental discrimination capability for unitary threats.

Computer program design upgrades are in work to expand the current selection accuracy and add capability against more stressing unitary and separating target scenes using target features observed by the Aegis radar system and the KW LWIR seeker to optimize selection confidence. Leveraging off discrimination architecture used across Raytheon’s missile programs, SM-3 continues to evolve an integrated discrimination design for insertion with the current seeker design and each of the sensing and signal processor upgrades available to counter advancing threats.

Raytheon is working closely with the Navy to ensure that SM-3, based on legacy Standard tactical missile designs, stands ready to provide immediate emergency Aegis BMD capability against preponderant threats. The SM-3 Block I KW configuration features a single color LWIR seeker, a solid DACS propulsion, target identification and discrimination, and lethal intercept accuracy.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/sm3.htm



Sea-Based National Missile Defense
The Heritage Foundation report Defending America, A Plan to Meet the Urgent Missile Threat advocates a combined sea-based and space-based, global BMD architecture. The initial defense capability would be based upon the U.S. Navy’s twenty-two AEGIS cruisers carrying NTW Block II interceptor missiles, supported by a constellation of low orbit Space-Based Infrared (SBIRS-Low) satellites for launch detection, target tracking and engagement control. The Heritage Report focuses on a sea-based, global anti-missile capability, which they believe could provide the earliest protection against emergent Rest of World (ROW) ballistic missiles. The capability alone does not meet all the requirements of the JROC-approved NMD Operational Requirements Document (ORD). The ORD requires an initial NMD system able to achieve a high confidence, highly effective defense of all 50 states, against a simple, stressful, strategic ballistic missile threat.
The strategic ballistic missile threats to the US have different characteristics than the ballistic missiles that threaten overseas theaters of operation. NMD threat missiles are faster; cooler due to payload separation and an extended exoatmospheric flight; and may incorporate sophisticated penetration aids. The NTW Block II interceptor features a LEAP kill vehicle. Although LEAP appears to have sufficient divert capability to support engagement of unsophisticated NMD threats, it would require improvement of the infrared sensor to acquire cooler, more advanced NMD threats. Engaging the most difficult threats would require kill vehicle capabilities similar to those found in the EKV now being developed for the land-based NMD system.

If suitable external sensors are employed, the NTW Block II interceptor would become capable of using early commit-quality tracks of ICBM and SLBM boosters and reentry vehicles. In this modified configuration, an NMD system based on the NTW Block II interceptor could protect the US against attacks from N. Korea and other “Rest of World” (ROW) threats. Depending on the attacking country and details of the attack scenario, modified ships may be needed in as few as 3 different locations at sea to provide this protection, or in as many as 13 locations to provide protection against all of these countries simultaneously.

The cost for the stand-alone sea-based architecture to protect all 50 states is estimated to be $16B to $19B (ROM) (includes estimated $700M for NTW Block II RDT&E). More than $8B (ROM) is associated with sensors and BM/C3. For the sea-based architecture case, lower military construction costs would be offset by higher interceptor development and procurement costs, since this case would require a new interceptor not now under development, and it would require many more interceptors than are needed for the land-based case. In addition, the sea-based case would require dedicated launch platforms. These may be as simple as platforms equipped with the vertical launch system and the appropriate communications system, or as complex as full-up AEGIS ships. The afore stated estimate includes the cost of 3 to 6 AEGIS-type ships as a rough estimate of the ship acquisition costs. The sea-based architecture case could also add $0.1B per year (ROM) to O&S.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/..._sea-based.htm


ABM capability with LEAP homing vehicle. 3 stage rocket consisting of 1 x Mk 72 + 1 x Mk 104 + 1 x ASAS

Historical Essay © Andreas Parsch

Raytheon RIM-161 Standard SM-3

The SM-3 (Standard Missile 3) is a derivative of the RIM-156 Standard SM-2ER Block IV missile, and is the missile component of the U.S. Navy's forthcoming theater-wide ballistic missile defense system, called NTW-TBMD (Navy Theater Wide - Theater Ballistic Missile Defense). It is an upper-tier ballistic missile defense weapon, originally planned to complement the lower-tier SM-2ER Block IV A, but the latter has been cancelled in December 2001.

The SM-3 missile, designated RIM-161A, uses the basic SM-2ER Block IV A airframe and propulsion, and adds a third stage rocket motor (a.k.a. Advanced Solid Axial Starge, ASAS, made by Alliant Techsystems), a GPS/INS guidance section (a.k.a. GAINS, GPS-Aided Inertial Navigation System), and a LEAP (Lightweight Exo-Atmosspheric Projectile) kinetic warhead (i.e. a non-explosive hit-to-kill warhead). The launching ships will be updated with Aegis LEAP Intercept (ALI) computer soft- and hardware.

The LEAP uses a FLIR (Forward-Looking Infrared) sensor to locate its target, and was tested in a 4-flight series called Terrier/LEAP from 1992 to 1995. These tests used modified Terrier and Standard SM-2 missiles. Two intercepts were attempted during these tests, but the LEAP failed to hit the target in both cases. The first flight-test of an RIM-161A SM-3 missile occurred in September 1999, and the third test (in January 2001) demonstrated successful missile flight and control up to fourth stage (i.e. kinetic warhead) separation. In January 2002, the first all-up test of an RIM-161A succeeded in hitting an Aries ballistic target missile. Testing of the basic SM-3 and ALI system capabilities will continue through 2003, and flight tests against more realistic targets are currently planned to begin in late 2003 or early 2004.

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/stardsm3.htm

Raytheon RIM-161 Standard SM-3
The SM-3 (Standard Missile 3) is a derivative of the RIM-156 Standard SM-2ER Block IV missile, and is the missile component of the U.S. Navy's forthcoming theater-wide ballistic missile defense system, called NTW-TBMD (Navy Theater Wide - Theater Ballistic Missile Defense). It is an upper-tier ballistic missile defense weapon, originally planned to complement the lower-tier SM-2ER Block IV A, but the latter has been cancelled in December 2001.

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-161.html
National Missile Defense system

http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/html/mdalink.html

[82Rigger]

If that hydrazine fuel is consumed (burned) then the problem with it is over.

But if it isn't...then I don't see how it's any safer just because it's in the upper atmosphere. It will eventually end up down here.

Steve

[locksly]

Martin Marietta Sprint
The Sprint was a nuclear-armed point defense ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile), which was developed in the 1960s as one component of an American defense system against Soviet ICBMs. It was operational for a very short time in 1975.

In the late 1950s, the U.S. Army began the development of the XLIM-49A Nike Zeus B exo-atmospheric anti-ballistic missile. While it was definitely desirable to intercept ICBMs at the highest possible altitude to minimize the contamination effects of the interceptor missile's thermonuclear warhead, it was also clear that a terminal defense missile would be needed to catch those reentry vehicles which slipped past the "first line" of defense. After studies in the early 1960s showed that a very-high speed interceptor missile was feasable, Martin Marietta received a development contract for the Sprint missile in March 1963. Component testing began in early 1964, including launches of Squirt experimental missiles. The first Sprint launch occured at WSMR (White Sands Missile Range) in November 1965, and Sprint tests continued at WSMR through 1970.
The cone-shaped Sprint missile was powered by a two-stage solid-propellant rocket motor. The motor ignited after the missile had been ejected from its silo by gas pressure, and accelerated the Sprint with more than 100 g. Within seconds, the missile reached a speed of Mach 10+, and the extreme thermodynamic heating demanded sophisticated ablative shielding (the nose was already glowing red-hot less than a second after launch). The Sprint was guided to the target by radio-commands from the ground control system, which used high-speed phased-array MSRs to track the incoming ICBM reentry vehicles. The command uplink had to be powerful enough to work through the exhaust plume and the plasma sheathe around the missile body. Sprint's first stage used fluid-injection jet vanes for control, and the second stage had four small moving fins. The missile was armed with a 1 kT W-66 enhanced radiation thermonuclear warhead, which was detonated by ground command. It destroyed the target's warhead not only with the nuclear blast, but mainly with the very high neutron flux. The whole flight time for an intercept was expected to be not more than 15 seconds.

Full scale testing of the Sprint and the MSR (Missile Site Radar) began in mid-1970, and the first successful intercept of a reentry vehicle by a Sprint occurred in December 1970. A total of about 50 flight tests, the majority being successful, were conducted between this date and December 1973.
During the 1960s, the initially planned nation-wide ABM system had been reduced in scope for cost reasons (see also article about LIM-49 Spartan). The final plan, introduced in 1969, was called Safeguard, an ABM system to defend only SAC's ICBM bases, and not the cities of the United States. The SALT I treaty of 1972, and a 1974 addendum, limited Safeguard to only one site with 100 ABMs. On 1 October 1975, the U.S.'s one and only Safeguard ABM site became operational with 30 LIM-49A Spartan and 70 Sprint missiles. However, because the very limited defense offered by a single ABM site did not warrant the costs, the site was deactivated by Congress the next day. About 150 Sprint missiles were built for flight tests and operational deployment.

In May 1971, Martin Marietta had received a contract for an improved missile called Sprint II. This variant would have had an improved guidance system, higher agility and improved reliability, but the Sprint II program did apparently not result in any flight tests. Studies of nuclear armed ABMs were finally ended in 1983.

Designation Note: Several sources (including [2]) explicitly say that Sprint never received a formal missile designation (LIM-nnn). However, it is possible that one of the designations XLIM-99A and XLIM-100A, which were reserved in October 1972, was in fact planned for Sprint (but not taken up for unknown reasons).
Specifications
Note: Data given by several sources show slight variations. Figures given below may therefore be inaccurate!

Data for Sprint:

Length 8.20 m (26 ft 11 in)
Diameter 1.35 m (4 ft 5 in)
Weight 3500 kg (7700 lb)
Speed Mach 10+
Ceiling 30000 m (100000 ft)
Range 40 km (25 miles)
Propulsion 1st stage: Hercules X-265 solid-fueled rocket; 2900 kN (650000 lb) for 1.2 s
2nd stage: Hercules X-271 solid-fueled rocket
Warhead W-66 thermonuclear (1 kT)

Main Sources
[1] James N. Gibson: "Nuclear Weapons of the United States", Schiffer Publishing Ltd, 1996
[2] Bill Gunston: "The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Rockets and Missiles", Salamander Books Ltd, 1979
[3] R.T. Pretty, D.H.R. Archer (eds.): "Jane's Weapon Systems 1972-73", Jane's, 1973
[4] Mark Paine: Nuclear ABMs of the USA
http://www.designation-systems.net/d...p4/sprint.html


Safeguard
On the 14th March 1969, Nixon announced another change in the deployment of the ABM system which was called Safeguard. This consisted of 12 installations of both Spartan and Sprint missiles and provided a limited defence against incoming ballistic missiles and fractional-orbit bombardment missiles (FOBS). Even this reduced ABM system meet stiff political opposition with the US congress approving it by only the deciding vote of Vice-President Spiro Agnew on 6 August 1969. This initial Phase I deployment consisted of two sites for the protection of the Minutemen ICBM missiles. The sites selected for this first phase were Malmstrom AFB in Montana and Grand Forks AFB in North Dakota.

Phase II deployment consisted of construction of a Safeguard site at Whiteman AFB Missouri, and for advanced construction works at Warren AFB Wyoming. This Phase II, which also consisted of missile inventories for the Phase I sites, was approved in December 1970. However, advanced preparation for another four sites was not approved.

In November 1971, funding was provided for system studies for the installation of a site to protect Washington DC so that the National Command Authority could be protected. Beyond these studies, no further work was ever done for a site to protect the US national capital.

It was early in the 1970s that diplomatic efforts between the USA and the Soviet Union started to pave the way for limited disarmament and arms control. The first of these was the SALT I agreement which limited each country to two 100 ABM missile sites. As a result, in May 1972 all construction work at Montana was suspended as it was some 19 months behind the construction work at Grand Forks. The SALT agreement was further amended on 3 July 1974 to a single ABM site which could either protect the nations capital or an ICBM site.

The installation at Grand Forks reached initial operational condition in April 1975 with 28 Sprint and 8 Spartan missiles. It was declared fully operational on 1 October 1975 with 70 Sprint and 30 Spartan missiles.

On 2 October 1975, the US Congress voted to shut down the system. A final bill was passed in November 1975 that allowed the PAR to continue to function, but the MSR was to be turned off, and the missiles disarmed and removed. Starting in February 1976, the US Army shut down the MSR and started to remove the warheads from the missiles as well as removing the missiles from their launching cells. The site had barely operated for 5 months.

It seems strange that the US Congress voted to shut the system down after it had been operational for barely 24 hours. The were many reasons why it was done. Many were political, and some were technological. It had been known for many years, that the system could be overwhelmed by the Soviets if they used multiple warheads on their missiles - the Soviets were arming their missiles with MIRVs. It was also felt that the huge radars were very vulnerable to attack and represented a critical failure point of the system, even though they had been designed with highly redundant systems and hardened against nuclear attack. Although these were well known problems with the Safeguard system, and all other systems before that, Congress just lost the ability to continue to support it.

Stanley R. Mickelson Complex
The Grand Forks installation was known as the Stanley R. Mickelson complex and was located approximately 160km (100 miles) northwest of Grand Forks. It was designed to protect the 150 Minuteman missiles located in that area as well as provide some defence to the civilian population of that area.

Only one PAR was constructed and was located near Cavalier in North Dakota some 40km (25 miles) north east of the missile site, while the MSR was located near the town of Nekoma, North Dakota.

Testing of the PAR at North Dakota began in August 1972 with it successfully tracking a satellite some 12 months later. It was not until another year later that the PAR Operational Acceptance test had been completed. Meanwhile the MSR started its tests in January 1973 with it successfully tracking a satellite in December of that year. Autonomous tests of the MSR were completed in June 1974 which when combined with the PAR tests permitted the entire installation to be handed over to the US Army in October 1974 on schedule.

Safeguard Developments
An active program during 1969 until 1972 was called Safesam which involved combining Safeguard sites and SAM-D (which later became Patriot) together to protect American cities. Another program which involved a bit more money was the Site Defence of Minuteman (SDM). This was basically the Sprint II missile program and was active during 1971-1974. SDM was developed into the Low Altitude Defence (LoAD) in 1979 for the protection of the MX missile. LoADS then became the Sentry system in June 1982. It was during 1983 that the connection to the nuclear ABM missiles was finally broken as a non-nuclear ABM system became more important in the area of politics and the Department of Defence.

http://www.nuclearabms.info/HSafeguard.html

Sentinel
Defence Secretary McNamara announced on 18th September 1967 plans for the Sentinel ABM defence system. This replaced the Nike X system and changed its focus from a general US defence to one of protecting against Chinese missile attack. At the time the Chinese were exploding nuclear devices and it was felt that they would have an ICBM capability around 1970.

There were a number of reasons for the US to switch to a Chinese threat. It allowed them to continue talks with the Soviets about arms reduction, handling a Chinese threat also presented a fewer number of targets that the ABM system was required to intercept when compared to a Soviet attack and also, it provided defence against a rogue missile launching either from the Soviets or Chinese or anyone else who decided to launch a missile to the US. It was essentially a system designed to be non-threatening to the Soviets.

Sentinel was a wide ranging system which consisted of a number of PARs across the northern boundary of the US as well as Alaska. MSRs were also located in at 13 locations in the US as well as in Alaska and Hawaii, with both Spartan (which was the name given to the Nike-EX missile) and Sprint missiles. The Hawaiian installation was the only site that did not have any Spartan missiles. The entire system had an estimated price tag of $5 billion which did not include R&D or operation and maintenance costs.

Opposition for the ABM was gradually increasing within the US. Vietnam was in full swing and was diverting a lot of funds from other projects and also increasing public opinion away from military projects. Late in 1968 (just as Nixon was elected President), public demonstrations in Seattle, Chicago and Boston about the deployment of nuclear missiles in their back yards started with earnest. An Army community relations meeting was held in Boston on January 29, 1969, where opponents to Sentinel were able to voice their concerns. As a result, Senator Edward Kennedy wrote a letter to the Defence Secretary Melvin Laird questioning the value of Sentinel. As a result of these demonstrations and meetings, construction at the Sharpner's Road site near Boston was halted.

In February 1969 President Nixon suspended Sentinel and ordered a review of the program. Barely a month later, it's deployment was redesigned and after being alive for only 18 months, Sentinel was declared dead and it was replaced with a new deployment which was called Safeguard.
http://www.nuclearabms.info/HSentinel.html
_________________________

[locksly]

U.S. official: Chinese test missile obliterates satellite
POSTED: 1:47 p.m. EST, January 19, 2007
Story Highlights• Chinese use a missile to ram and destroy an old, orbiting satellite
• Experts: China now may have ability to knock out U.S. GPS and spy satellites
• Washington issues formal diplomatic protest
Adjust font size:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- China last week successfully used a missile to destroy an orbiting satellite, U.S. government officials told CNN on Thursday, in a test that could undermine relations with the West and pose a threat to satellites important to the U.S. military.

According to a spokesman for the National Security Council, the ground-based, medium-range ballistic missile knocked an old Chinese weather satellite from its orbit about 537 miles above Earth. The missile carried a "kill vehicle" and destroyed the satellite by ramming it.

The test took place on January 11. (Watch why the U.S. has protested the missile strike )

Aviation Week and Space Technology first reported the test: "Details emerging from space sources indicate that the Chinese Feng Yun 1C (FY-1C) polar orbit weather satellite launched in 1999 was attacked by an asat (anti-satellite) system launched from or near the Xichang Space Center."

A U.S. official, who would not agree to be identified, said the event was the first successful test of the missile after three failures.

The official said that U.S. "space tracking sensors" confirmed that the satellite is no longer in orbit and that the collision produced "hundreds of pieces of debris," that also are being tracked.

The United States logged a formal diplomatic protest.

"We are aware of it and we are concerned, and we made it known," White House spokesman Tony Snow said.

Several U.S. allies, including Canada and Australia, have also registered protests, and the Japanese government said it was worrisome.

"Naturally, we are concerned about it from the viewpoint of security as well as peaceful use of space," said Yashuhisa Shiozaki, chief cabinet secretary. He said Japan has asked the Chinese government for an explanation.

Britain has complained about lack of consultation before the test and potential damage from the debris it left behind, The Associated Press reported.

The United States has been able to bring down satellites with missiles since the mid-1980s, according to a history of ASAT programs posted on the Union of Concerned Scientists Web site. In its own test, the U.S. military knocked a satellite out of orbit in 1985.

Under a space policy authorized by President Bush in August, the United States asserts a right to "freedom of action in space" and says it will "deter others from either impeding those rights or developing capabilities intended to do so."

The policy includes the right to "deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to U.S. national interests."

Low Earth-orbit satellites have become indispensable for U.S. military communications, GPS navigation for smart bombs and troops, and for real-time surveillance. The Chinese test highlights the satellites' vulnerability.

"If we, for instance, got into a conflict over Taiwan, one of the first things they'd probably do would be to shoot down all of our lower Earth-orbit spy satellites, putting out our eyes," said John Pike of globalsecurity.org, a Web site that compiles information on worldwide security issues.

"The thing that is surprising and disturbing is that [the Chinese] have chosen this moment to demonstrate a military capability that can only be aimed at the United States," he said.

Copyright 2007 CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/0...ile/index.html