NASA Says Don't Worry About Falling Satellite

mrdude2010

New member
Aug 6, 2009
1,315
0
0
35 meters isn't that big in the global scheme of things. the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs was 50 times that big

also remember the earth is like 73% water, so i mean chances are it won't even hit anything important
 

aashell13

New member
Jan 31, 2011
547
0
0
DaxStrife said:
NASA really needs some kind of recycling program. They track where the satellites are after their "missions" are over, why couldn't a shuttle nab it on its way back so they could strip it for parts?
Because the shuttles are all museum pieces now.
Besides, there isn't anything on board that's worth the cost of recovering.
They track the defunct objects mainly to make sure they don't hit anything important: the ISS, other satellites, your house...
 

kebab4you

New member
Jan 3, 2010
1,451
0
0
Really people? It took you this long to realise that for an satellite to orbit around earth it need to be under the force of earth gravity else it will just kinda stay idle(or pull towards something else).So of course it will fall down sooner or later unless you give it a boost outwards every now and then ._.
 

aashell13

New member
Jan 31, 2011
547
0
0
Xan Krieger said:
If only it would "accidentally" fall on Kim Jong Il.
I'm sure the Air Force has been begging for permission to do this for years.

Scorched_Cascade said:
I blame the Batarians! Don't they know that satellite dumping is deemed a war crime by the interplanetary council? I propose a counter strike into the Terminus systems.
YES! We must alert Cmdr. FemShep Immediately! Assemble the Arcturus fleet!
 

gabe12301

New member
Jun 30, 2010
1,371
0
0
DaxStrife said:
NASA really needs some kind of recycling program. They track where the satellites are after their "missions" are over, why couldn't a shuttle nab it on its way back so they could strip it for parts?
Because we don't use shuttles anymore. Those parts are just metal and it cost 51 million (and counting) to pay Russia to do it for us. we'd be better off leaving it be.
 

Kl4pp5tuhl

New member
Apr 15, 2009
136
0
0
You're not supposed to touch it because it has been in space for a long time, meaning the parts are partially radioactive.

DaxStrife said:
NASA really needs some kind of recycling program. They track where the satellites are after their "missions" are over, why couldn't a shuttle nab it on its way back so they could strip it for parts?
This is mentioned every time someone mentions space debree, but here goes

[ youtube=DakRYsUIiIE ]
 

FrostyChick

Little Miss Vampire.
Jul 13, 2010
678
0
21
Don't worry American people. The fiery ball of metal hurtling through the atmosphere is perfectly safe. There is nothing to fear, it will not impact with your house and kill your friends, family, loved ones, your pet cat Suzy and your dog Spot. Jk, jk we're all fucked, especially you Adrian. o.o
 

Khundes

New member
Mar 25, 2011
11
0
0
The reason this is perfectly safe can be seen in a past tragedy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Columbia_disaster

The shuttle broke into a large number of pieces and no one died from any of them.

And even then this isn't an example that matches the situation, as Columbia was built with the intent of not falling apart in atmospheric reentry, whereas satellites are pretty much the opposite.

Oh, and remember when Mir was disposed of through atmospheric reentry? Though in that case they planned for it to fall in the sea. But still, no deaths recorded from that crash either, and it was much bigger.



Now, as for why NASA's insisting so much about the safety of the story? If they weren't, don't you think media outlets would be chewing them out about "potential risks"? (And I full well assume a certain Faux Noise will get on that regardless) They mean it when they say it poses no risk to human life, and that insistence is because NASA kind of needs public support to do what it does. Plus as stated earlier, managing space debris beyond the scope of "Will it break something we have functioning up there?" is a pure waste of money, and NASA sure as hell doesn't want to be pressured into using it's razor-thin budget on crap like that.
 

Doc Theta Sigma

New member
Jan 5, 2009
1,451
0
0
Jaime_Wolf said:
Greg Tito said:
It's an imperfect world. Satellites fall down all the time. Or at least that's what NASA wants you to believe
Greg Tito said:
Not like it really matters, because a 6 ton satellite falling on your head isn't a problem or anything.
This takes the level of terrible writing and ridiculous spin that's become the norm on the Escapist news stories to an entirely new level.

Satellites don't fall because it's an imperfect world (what the fuck does that even mean?), satellites fall because they're put into orbits where we know they'll fall before we even put them there in the first place. This isn't some strange accident, it's a normal, completely predictable occurrence.

And "that's what NASA wants you to believe"? Are you fucking kidding me? I barely even know how to respond to how asinine that sounds. Satellites fall all the time. Often, you can see them falling. You can see records of the countless satellites that have fallen. You can see the projected dates of when a lot of satellites will fall.

The second quote really drives home the lengths contributors are willing to go to to drive interest in an article. I'm assuming here that it's an attempt at baiting for pageviews since the alternative, that the contributor is actually that ignorant about a topic he's reporting on, is not a possibility I really wish to entertain.

The reality of the situation: they can make a relatively strong prediction about where it will land (protip: this is not a "simple physics calculation" based on its trajectory since the real world involves messy things like aerodynamics and we're talking about speeds and distances where a small change can have a big impact on the location of the crash site), the overwhelming majority of it will fall apart and burn up in atmosphere (which is the most immediate reason, though not the only reason by any means, why the second quote is so absolutely absurd), there has never been a recorded instance of falling space debris causing any serious damage, the chance of the debris hitting property or people is already absurdly low even if it didn't fall apart and burn up in atmosphere, they can make very robust predictions about when it will land (projections were surely made before the satellite was even sent up), and no, there isn't really any reasonable solution to letting satellites crash (the cost of bringing a satellite back during a shuttle mission would outstrip the gain in recycling the parts by several orders of magnitude).

TL;DR: Greg Tito, you should be fired. And then your name, aliases, and picture should be spread far and wide to all news outlets such that you never contribute another article this blatantly misleading and/or stupid.
If you come to the Escapist for serious news, you have problems.
 

Argtee

New member
Oct 31, 2009
1,394
0
0
Sounds fun terrifying.

I just hope that this doesn't land near where I live.
If it does...well...I'm gonna have to touch it.
Also:
Kl4pp5tuhl said:
You're not supposed to touch it because it has been in space for a long time, meaning the parts are partially radioactive.

DaxStrife said:
NASA really needs some kind of recycling program. They track where the satellites are after their "missions" are over, why couldn't a shuttle nab it on its way back so they could strip it for parts?
This is mentioned every time someone mentions space debree, but here goes

Fixed the video for everyone!
 

Albino Boo

New member
Jun 14, 2010
4,667
0
0
I'm old enough to remember Skylab coming back down, now that was something to worry about. The thing weighed 77 tons. So pah 6.5 tons I sneeze in your general direction.
 

kebab4you

New member
Jan 3, 2010
1,451
0
0
Doc Theta Sigma said:
Jaime_Wolf said:
Greg Tito said:
It's an imperfect world. Satellites fall down all the time. Or at least that's what NASA wants you to believe
Greg Tito said:
Not like it really matters, because a 6 ton satellite falling on your head isn't a problem or anything.
This takes the level of terrible writing and ridiculous spin that's become the norm on the Escapist news stories to an entirely new level.

Wall of text.

TL;DR: Greg Tito, you should be fired. And then your name, aliases, and picture should be spread far and wide to all news outlets such that you never contribute another article this blatantly misleading and/or stupid.
If you come to the Escapist for serious news, you have problems.
I think it´s safe to assume the news we do get is above the same standard of fox news. But out over that I would love to see you write for the escapist Jaime, was an interesting tell off :)
 

Jaime_Wolf

New member
Jul 17, 2009
1,194
0
0
cyrogeist said:
Jaime_Wolf said:
while i agree...im just gonna say this...you just bashed an escapist news guy...you have a 90% chance of banning :C
I will be sorely disappointed if it comes to that. I suppose we'll see. It's not as though I was just ranting and railing at someone I didn't like for personal reasons - the article is blatantly misleading, ignorant, and takes a completely inappropriate tone.

Hell, it invites people to panic about a completely safe situation. The level of irresonspibility is staggering.
 

Greg Tito

PR for Dungeons & Dragons
Sep 29, 2005
12,070
0
0
Jaime_Wolf said:
TL;DR: Greg Tito, you should be fired. And then your name, aliases, and picture should be spread far and wide to all news outlets such that you never contribute another article this blatantly misleading and/or stupid.
Dude, seriously. The tone of this post was a joke. Sorry you missed the obvious.

Greg
 

cryogeist

New member
Apr 16, 2010
7,782
0
0
anyway...time for my post...and all i have to say....what goes up! must come down...
anyway i'm just worried where this things gonna hit...and knowing my shit luck it's probably gonna be my house.
 

Niccolo

New member
Dec 15, 2007
274
0
0
Caliostro said:
-Snip of kinetic bombardment post
Interesting that someone else knows of that plan - but I hearda rumour in the wind that they were possibly scrapping that one.

Anyway, the mass of one of the rods from God is approximately 3.1 US tons - 2.8 metric tonnes. However, they're tipped in a tungsten alloy that's ridiculously heat-resistant so as to stop it from burning up - so most of those three tons hits whatever was targeted.

Satellites aren't exactly fireproofed, since there's no real need to fireproof something designed for a world where fire is physically impossible barring magic, which means they mostly burn up and vaporise on the way in.

They tend to break up into lots of little pieces, too. While this is still not exactly the ideal situation, it's a hell of a lot better than a bigass dart hitting someone square in the face.
 

staika

I am Tizzy's Willing Slave
Aug 3, 2009
8,376
0
41
Now a satellite is going to fall on my house now because now I know that they can.
"Hey ma! whats that in the sky?"
"OH look its a shooting star!"
"Lets make a wish on it"
*I wish for health and safety*
"Hey why is the star getting closer?"
"OH SHIT IT'S A FALLING SATELLITE!!"
*satellite falls on my house*
"Damn you satellites!!!"