No Danger Seen From Satellite Debris

(AP)  The military's analysis of the missile strike on a dead U.S. spy satellite has revealed no sign of danger from debris, including no hazard from the satellite's fuel tank, a Pentagon spokesman said Friday.

"As we continue to do the post-strike analysis, (it) continues to give us confidence that the hydrazine tank was ruptured. However, the analysis is still ongoing," spokesman Bryan Whitman said.

U.S. officials have said the main reason they shot down the satellite was because of the potential health hazard to humans in the event the satellite's fuel tank, carrying 1,000 pounds of toxic hydrazine, landed in a populated area. The satellite lost power shortly after reaching its initial orbit in December 2006, and it was projected to re-enter the atmosphere in the first days of March.

On Wednesday night a Navy cruiser in the Pacific launched a missile at the satellite, and military video of the event indicated that it pulverized the spacecraft.

Whitman said initial indications reported on Thursday that the SM-3 missile hit the fuel tank as planned have been reinforced by further analysis. But he said officials are still not 100 percent certain.

"There has been no new data that has changed our level of confidence in the success of the operation," he said.

Whitman said there were no indications of danger posed by falling debris, some of which already has re-entered the atmosphere. Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said on Thursday that they had detected no debris larger than a football, and Whitman said that as of Friday that statement remained true.

"Debris tracking and cataloguing is ongoing," Whitman said. "There is no change to our belief that most of the debris should re-enter within about two weeks."

Whitman also said that teams of experts assembled by the government in advance of the shootdown to be ready in case significant debris fell on U.S. soil might not be used.

"We are in the process of taking a look and standing down some of those consequence-management and recovery teams," he said.

[aldee41]

Has anyone noticed that this was done by a regular US Navy patrol ship of which we have many at sea around the world every day 24/7? Makes you wonder just how long we have had this capability.

The Chicoms did it from land, a much easier shot.

[erasmus6]

"Anything smaller than a football will burn to a crisp before hiting the ground." posted by Nancy_Naive

My point was that the debris could be the size of a football and still do damage because of the speed in which it would be traveling.

Awhile back there was a "rock" that came through the roof of someones home. It was smaller than a football. They figured it was a piece off an asteroid or something.

And if there isn''t anything larger than a football, then why are they watching out for debris?

[rushlimpdrug]

Hey folks I have a video like Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman Gen. James Cartwright points to the during news conference at the Pentagon.

I shot by pointing my video camera with a light toward a mirror.

I just didn''t have a newsconference to show my video.

[newmar3]

Good job Navy

[dopelgangera]

It''s no surprise that the fragments of the destroyed satellite would burn up as they went down. Many natural meteors enter Earth''s atmosphere every day, and burn up entirely in the atmosphere before ever landing.

[cbs_oliver]

I believe the hydrazine tank was made out of Beryllium. It has a very high melting point. ....

Posted by gll1955 at 05:50 PM : Feb 22, 2008
-----

Unless you have very good info otherwise I would doubt that beryllium was used.

There are some situations where beryllium is used because of its'' unique properties but it seems unlikely that it would be used for a vessel.

Commercial use of beryllium metal presents technical challenges due to the toxicity of beryllium-containing dusts.

Berylium actually has a very low melting point compared to other metals.

It is apparantly used in applications where it''s low atomic mass provides benefits. Nuclear related applications are a possibility.

[andor3]

"Great shot! You must admire the pinpoint accuracy and the sophisticated technology."

"Great job and Thank-You to all those responsible for the success of the mission! "

ummmmm why do you think there was any successful mission? because the Navy says it was and shows a photo with a bright blob? They have the motivation and means to fake it all. Not saying they did, but there just isn''t any credible evidence to back up their story and a lot of does not add up.

[jerkeedoodle]

No danger,LOL,Like they''d really tell you if there was.

[inventagod]

''If the tank did not rupture upon reentry (and the contents exposed to air), the hydrazine would still be very reactive and dangerous.

Posted by gll1955 at 05:50 PM : Feb 22, 2008''

While this could be true, I question the reasons the military gives for the ''shoot-down'' and all the supporting fanfare. This from a military who has shot so many weapons off all over the planet, including many nuclear tests...
And with all the debris that has fallen from the sky, a ''secret satellite'' is now a danger???

[VTchemist]

I believe the hydrazine tank was made out of Beryllium. It has a very high melting point. This large tank may have survived reentry. If the tank did not rupture upon reentry (and the contents exposed to air), the hydrazine would still be very reactive and dangerous.