No Danger Seen From Satellite Debris
Pentagon Sees No Hazard From Smashed Spy Satellite's Fuel Tank But Is Still Tracking Debris
-
-
Photo
Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman Gen. James Cartwright points to a video during news conference at the Pentagon, Thursday, Feb. 21, 2008, hours after a Navy missile scored a direct hit on the failing spacecraft. (AP Photo/Heesoon Yim)
-
Photo
This photo provided by the U.S. Navy shows an SM-3 missile being launched from the USS Lake Erie warship on Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2008. The Pentagon says the missile successfully intercepted a wayward U.S. spy satellite orbiting the earth at 17,000 miles per hour, about 133 nautical miles over the Pacific ocean. (AP Photo/US Navy)
-
Photo
This photo provided by the U.S. Navy shows Fire Controlman 2nd Class Andrew Jackson, of Raytown, Mo., launching an SM-3 missile from the USS Lake Erie warship on Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2008. The Pentagon says the missile successfully intercepted a wayward U.S. spy satellite orbiting the earth at 17,000 miles per hour, about 133 nautical miles over the Pacific ocean. (CBS/U.S. Navy, Handout)
-
Photo
This photo provided by the U.S. Navy shows an SM-3 missile being launched from the USS Lake Erie warship on Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2008. (CBS/U.S. Navy, Handout)
-
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Satellite Hit With One Shot
The crew of the Navy cruiser, U.S.S. Lake Erie, hit a defunct spy satellite in space with just one shot. Karen Brown reports.
-
Video
Spy Satellite Plan Underway
A U.S. Navy ship will attempt to destroy a defunct spy satellite with a specially modified missile. David Martin reports.
-
Video
Satellite Shoot-Down A First
The military is preparing to shoot down a dead spy satellite before it falls to earth with a tank full of toxic fuel. It's unlike anything the military has ever faced before. David Martin reports.
-
Interactive
Weapons Of War
Inside The U.S. Arsenal: The U.S. has some of the most sophisticated military aircraft and weaponry in the world.
-
Interactive
Military 101
Basic training to learn all about America's fighting force.
"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.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



It''s kind of a test of the media actually.
If the Pentagon claims the moon is made of green cheese and provides video to go with the story will the media dutifully tell the story that way?
In the case of CBS the answer is probably, "Yes."
That''s too bad.
Ahhh, the military is tracking football-sized pieces of debris at hundreds of miles distance.
Yet, on 9/11 they let three full-sized airliners wander around the United States, and were unable to even launch persuit fighters frob bases underneath them...
What to believe, what to believe...
Hydrazine - bad stuff. Do I believe this was the sole reason to shoot it down and cause a major political incident with Russia? No, how about it was a SPY satellite that stopped working just after getting to where it was suppose to be. Kind of reminds me of the Rock Hudson movie "Ice Station Zebra" that was just on TV. Fancy that. Not wanting major spy stuff to get ''lost'' makes much more sense.
And what is that supposed to mean? That it can''t do any harm? With the speed that it is travelling, it could be smaller than a golf ball and do harm. If it was to hit a person, it could kill them.
School(crazy)lord NO GUNS USED HERE.
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???
"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.
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.
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.
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?
-
by aldee41
February 24, 2008 9:53 AM PST
- 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.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 17 CommentsThe Chicoms did it from land, a much easier shot.