Navy Scores Direct Hit on Spy Satellite

Russians who are trying to come back in the military power game have just been handed a major defeat.

Of course we should expect a Putin sound bite,"we have the technology and using it for many years....No Problemmmmmmmmm."

Whatever you say Ivan. You're absolutely right.

Go US Navy !!!!!!

The use of the Standard missle, who's anti-aircraft designs go as far back as the late 1950's, makes tremendous sense,as new technology is incorporated, largely propellant and electronics. This provides a progressive record of use over decades,even despite the missle being far superior to what was possible only a few years ago. This progressive,and logical approach to their space program,has long been used by the Russian space program. For those who have noticed the new US Orion moon rocket looks a lot like the 1960's vintage Apollo...

Shades of Tom Clancy, he used this in a book about 15 years ago. Go Navy!!!!!!!

Note that "modifications" from an IR seeking to a ?? seeking or radar guided or what ever was done rather quickly. This tells us that the tech wasn't invented this year. The tech was off-the-shelf and easily inserted into an existing weapon system. This was a powerful demonstration of US tech capabilities, flexibility, and deploy-ability. No other country can match it. I wonder what else is sitting on the tech shelf or even operational. The SR-71's retirement didn't leave a void.

"The Pentagon determined it should hit it with the missile just before it re-entered Earth's atmosphere, to minimize the amount of debris that would remain in space."

Someone explain how this makes any sense... Physorg!!!

lets just have a bunch of toxic space garbage orbiting the earth for hundreds of years instead... that's sounds like a plan!

navy got lucky to perform that one, bush's 12 gauge shotgun was just not working that day yeeHAW

So, an object in motion tends to stay in motion. So what happens to the kinetic mass war-head? No-one has said what it is made of. The military likes depleated uranium for mass projectiles but I am sure that they could have used something else that is fairly dense. Yet, did it / could it survive the impact and would its trajectory then carry it into a low earth orbit or .... ?

It doesn't take much mass/density to do a lot of damage at 17,000 mph. After all, a piece of foam insulation traveling about 500 mph was enough to crack the wing of the Columbia space shuttle.

"The Pentagon determined it should hit it with the missile just before it re-entered Earth's atmosphere, to minimize the amount of debris that would remain in space."

Someone explain how this makes any sense... Physorg!!!

What ever is up there will come down, eventually.Somewhere.Lack of radio contact means we cant' control its manuvering thrusters, hence orbit. What does remain however long you don't want something or someone to run into it. Or get hold of it.

The "war-headless" impactor can be of suprising low mass,part of the effect is achieved by a graduated formulation/cross section,each designed for varied results. At 17K,mph give or take,a properly designed device will create a thermal wave that will largely vaporize most targets.Where as an anti-tank round has the warhead focused by explosive into a molten-metal jet, here kinetic energy does the rest.The goal to target the Sat.is have the the energy expand outward,not inward.

HEAT perhaps but http://en.wikiped...netrator

"energy expand outward,not inward." is babel.

The satellite was carrying hydrazine....... not good for the health

I knew China and Russia would cry foul. Oh well, fish got to swim, birds have to fly.. China has to cry foul when somebody may have a winning hand over them.

I'm just glad that the toxic substance burnt up in the atmosphere. Hopefully neutralized. Bravo, US Navy. Maybe next time you'll get to practice with your railgun!

It is interesting that both Russia and Iran have rattled sabers recently. Russia has buzzed our fleet and coastal defenses with long range bombers. Iran has launched a "space probe" and promised to launch a satellite this summer.

I believe these irritants made it easy for the Pentagon to commit to eliminating the "Hydrazine Threat" by destroying the satellite.

Clearly, if we can do this on first try with a target 150 miles above the earth, using a slightly modified standard air-defense missile, obsolete Russian bombers and Iranian (novice) satellites are not much of a challenge.

I believe odds were slim that the satellite would have caused harm when it was due to fall next month, even with all that hydrazine on board. I believe it would have been easy to skip this exercise if it had not also provided an excellent reminder to the saber rattlers that we maintain a massive lead in this technology. This should give them pause when they consider attempting to revive the long-dead arms race.