pat@pyuxd.UUCP (Pat M. Iurilli) (12/04/88)
Does anyone out there in netland know any details on the so-called "secret"
military satellite payload that the Atlantis is carrying and will deploy?
According to a report on National Public Radio on Thursday, one of the
Soviet newspapers reported the name of the "secret" satellite and its
specifications, so if they already know, who'll tell us at least that much?
Anyone read Russian and willing to post a translation of this article?
--
Pat M. Iurilli Bell Communications Research Piscataway, NJ 201-699-4419
{rutgers, ihnp4, allegra}!{bcr, bellcore}!pyuxd!patcalderaa@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Alan J. Caldera) (12/04/88)
I was watching CNN tonight, and they reported that Atlantis was carrying
a radar satellite. ( I forgot the acronym they gave, but the satellite's
primary function is to track targets over 80% of Soviet territory for
the Navy, Air Force and the Army.) I guess this is the first in the series
that will allow the proposed B-2 Stealth bomber to acquire targets.
The cost of this satellite is reported to be in the neighborhood of $500 mil.
That's all the info I have right now.
---
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote down for maintenance!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan J. Caldera IIIIII UUU UUU
Indiana University II U U
Bloomington, IN II U U
IIIIII UUUUUU
ARPA: calderaa@silver.bacs.indiana.edu
calderaa@gold.bacs.indiana.edu
UUCP: {inuxc,rutgers,pyramid,pur-ee}!iuvax!silver!calderaahenry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (12/05/88)
In article <684@pyuxd.UUCP> pat@pyuxd.UUCP (Pat M. Iurilli) writes: >Does anyone out there in netland know any details on the so-called "secret" >military satellite payload that the Atlantis is carrying and will deploy? The giveaway is the low-altitude (well, relatively low, it's high for the shuttle) and high-inclination orbit. This is a spysat of some kind, very probably a KH-12. It's a fairly good bet that the KH-12 looks a lot like the Hubble telescope. -- SunOSish, adj: requiring | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 32-bit bug numbers. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
jmckerna@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (THE VIKING) (12/06/88)
In article <1988Dec4.225033.18207@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >The giveaway is the low-altitude (well, relatively low, it's high for the >shuttle) and high-inclination orbit. This is a spysat of some kind, very >probably a KH-12. It's a fairly good bet that the KH-12 looks a lot like >the Hubble telescope. The media has said they believe the satellite uses an very powerful imaging radar, with a 1 meter resolution. While that does not preclude an optical system, it seems unlikely that a satellite with such a powerful radar system would also have an optical system as powerful as the Hubble telescope. The media also reports that the name of the satellite is "Lacrosse", although it might also be called the KH-12. John L. McKernan. Student, Computer Science, Cal Poly S.L.O. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [...imagine a time when evil Man is infecting the solar system...] "DEATH TO THE BARBARIC, SATANIC, GENETICALLY INFERIOR MARTIAN BACTERIA"!!!!!! -- Redneck frontiersman, 2050.
karn@ka9q.bellcore.com (Phil Karn) (12/07/88)
>The media has said they believe the satellite uses an very powerful imaging >radar, with a 1 meter resolution. While that does not preclude an optical >system, it seems unlikely that a satellite with such a powerful radar system >would also have an optical system as powerful as the Hubble telescope. A little thought reveals that even without the benefit of the published reports saying it's a radar satellite, it's highly unlikely that Atlantis's payload is an optical observation satellite. Earth observation satellites (weather, earth resources or spy) that operate with visible light work best in "sun synchronous" orbits, where the orbit plane keeps a constant angle to the sun direction over a relatively long period of time. This is a major advantage since many pictures can be taken of the same spot over time with a relatively constant illumination angle. The 57 degree inclination orbit of Atlantis's payload has some nasty characteristics as far as earth illumination goes; as the orbit plane precesses, there will be long intervals during which most of the ground underneath the satellite is in darkness, which would make a visible light satellite rather useless. A radar satellite, on the other hand, doesn't care if it's night or day on the ground. (But I'm sure the solar power availability and thermal control problems this orbit presents gave Lacrosse's designers some real headaches.) Phil
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (12/08/88)
In article <12418@bellcore.bellcore.com> karn@ka9q.bellcore.com (Phil Karn) writes: >A little thought reveals that even without the benefit of the published >reports saying it's a radar satellite, it's highly unlikely that Atlantis's >payload is an optical observation satellite. Earth observation satellites >(weather, earth resources or spy) that operate with visible light work best >in "sun synchronous" orbits... The 57 degree >inclination orbit of Atlantis's payload has some nasty characteristics as >far as earth illumination goes... However, if what you've got is a shuttle-unique payload (which at least some rumors claim the KH-12 is), you just have to settle for what you can get, and that ugly orbit is the best you're going to get if you need high-latitude coverage with a shuttle launch from the Cape. If you're in a big hurry to get the thing up -- all three of the near-future shuttle military payloads are in a fair hurry -- you might settle for it. (An earlier example is that the Teal Ruby infrared-sensor payload is shuttle-unique, REALLY REALLY wants a higher-inclination orbit, to test infrared aircraft tracking against the broken ice at the edge of the polar cap [a severe worst-case background, and of considerable practical importance], and is probably going to have to settle for 57 degrees.) Frankly, I don't think we have enough evidence to say *what* that thing is. The USAF and CIA have been doing a good job on disinformation on this bird; this is the third different story within a month or so. I'm not convinced there won't be a fourth. I'll go along with Lacrosse as a working hypothesis but I don't think a KH-12 can be ruled out. -- SunOSish, adj: requiring | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 32-bit bug numbers. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
gordon@prls.UUCP (Gordon Vickers) (12/10/88)
In article <1988Dec8.001846.26121@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: > >However, if what you've got is a shuttle-unique payload (which at least >some rumors claim the KH-12 is), you just have to settle for what you A PBS show I watched a several months ago ( Spy Satellites ) claimed that we had but one KH-12 left in orbit and it was being used sparingly. They reported it's resolution as being good enough to tell if as little as six inches had been added to a structure's height (missles in particular). They also mentioned that a newer version, the KH-14 had been build and had even better resolution but could not be deployed until the shuttle launches resumed. So, I'd like to take the pleasure of starting another rumor as to what this last shuttle's payload was: it was a KH-14 (an educated guess based solely upon the contents of the program I watched). Better resolution than the KH-12 ? My gosh, what do they want to do, identify birth marks ? Should I cross post this to rec.nude ? :-) Gordon Vickers 408/991-5370 (Sunnyvale,Ca); {mips|pyramid|philabs}!prls!gordon
karn@jupiter..bellcore.com (Phil R. Karn) (12/10/88)
>Frankly, I don't think we have enough evidence to say *what* that thing is.
Henry's points are well taken. However, I can say that the laws of physics
are as yet still unclassified, so I have run an eclipse predictor for the
next six months on the last known orbital elements for STS-27.
At the moment, the satellite is in continuous sunlight, i.e., it is flying
roughly in the plane of the terminator. It reaches its northernmost latitude
at roughly midday local time. This is consistent with the report we heard
of the astronauts conducting visual observations of the USSR from the
shuttle.
But things are changing. The orbit plane is precessing 4.28 degrees westward
per day, while the terminator is moving eastward about a degree per day.
This means that the local time at a given point on the earth as seen by the
satellite during its passes will slowly change.
Short eclipses start on Dec 12. By the end of December, they will be about
36 minutes long. So far so good; this is less than half of each orbit, which
is how long eclipses typically are in sun-synchronous orbit (unless you are
again flying roughly in the plane of the terminator). The eclipses stay
more or less at this length for a while until mid February when they stop
(the orbit plane again matching the terminator for a while).
But by mid March 1989, the orbit plane will have precessed (and the
terminator moved by the earth's motion around the sun) such that each day's
passes over Moscow will all find it in darkness; the passes begin after
sundown and end before sunrise. This continues until the plane has again
precessed so that daylight flights can be made, a fairly slow process. So
if the satellite is an visible-light optical one, it would be useless for
quite long intervals due to its orbit. The evidence that the satellite
does not require daylight over the USSR to function is therefore quite
strong.
Caveat: this is all based on a quick look using my tracking program; to
analyze this properly I should write a program that specifically looks for
the information I want.
Phildant@mrloog.LA.TEK.COM (Dan Tilque;1893;92-101;) (12/10/88)
Phil Karn writes: >in darkness, which would make a visible light satellite rather useless. A >radar satellite, on the other hand, doesn't care if it's night or day on the >ground. (But I'm sure the solar power availability and thermal control >problems this orbit presents gave Lacrosse's designers some real headaches.) Isn't a radar satellite fairly easy to jam? Of course, you don't want to jam just the areas around sensitive installations so you'd have to put many 'dummy' jammers all over the place. And the jamming would make it difficult to operate other transmitters anywhere near the same frequency. Or perhaps the purpose is not to look at specific installations but to map approach routes for cruise missiles. --- Dan Tilque -- dant@twaddl.LA.TEK.COM "It's our fault. We should have given him better parts." -- Jack Warner on hearing that Ronald Reagan had been elected Governor of California.
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (12/13/88)
In article <12485@bellcore.bellcore.com> karn@jupiter.UUCP (Phil R. Karn) writes: >... I have run an eclipse predictor for the >next six months on the last known orbital elements for STS-27. >... by mid March 1989, the orbit plane will have precessed (and the >terminator moved by the earth's motion around the sun) such that each day's >passes over Moscow will all find it in darkness; the passes begin after >sundown and end before sunrise.... I don't have much of a feel for eclipse geometries -- what's the equivalent "shadow period" for, say, Sakhalin Island or Vladivostok? That is, for what period is the *whole* USSR "in shadow"? That would seem a better measure of the period in which the satellite is useless. (My gut feeling is that it's roughly the same period, since the underlying problem is that the high-northern-latitude part of the orbit's ground track is in shadow, but I'd be interested in confirmation.) >...The evidence that the satellite >does not require daylight over the USSR to function is therefore quite >strong. I'm afraid I have to disagree. What Phil has done is to supply quantitative backing for his earlier observation that this is far from an ideal orbit for a "daylight" satellite. That doesn't affect my observation, which is that it's the best orbit the US can manage for a satellite that's too big for a Titan 34D. (The KH11 would fit on a Titan, but there are no more KH11s.) I would amend Phil's conclusion to something like: There is therefore quite strong evidence that either (a) the satellite does not require daylight over the USSR to function, or (b) launching a new daylight-optical satellite was considered urgent enough to justify use of an orbit which seriously limits the satellite's usefulness. -- SunOSish, adj: requiring | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 32-bit bug numbers. | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
karn@ka9q.bellcore.com (Phil Karn) (12/13/88)
>Isn't a radar satellite fairly easy to jam?
Not necessarily. I have no information one way or the other, but I
would be very surprised if the Lacrosse doesn't use spread spectrum.
Nevertheless, it ought to be possible to determine (by listening) the
approximate frequency bands used by this radar, because it must be operating
with substantial effective radiated power. Another project for all you
amateur sleuths out there...
Philanderer@vax1.acs.udel.EDU (David G Anderer) (12/13/88)
Actually, Deep Black makes a good case that this payload was a KH-12. "Kennedy Space Center planning charts showed the first KH-12 launch, originally scheduled for the shuttle's second launch from Vandenburg as Mission 62-B, had been changed to the second shuttle launch from the Kennedy Space Center at Canaveral after shuttle flight resumed." Other points made are that the KH-12 has a *large* maneuvering fuel capacity, so the 57 degree limitation from Kennedy could be overcome. This all makes sense when coupled with the horrible state of US imaging capability over the last few years: One KH-11 in orbit in late '85, the next one (the last production one) lost in an '85 launch, Challenger, the last KH-9 destroyed when the 34D exploded out of Vandenburg in April '86. So we had one KH-11 in orbit, due to expire in late '87, one prototype KH-11 that might be made space-worthy (was it?), and a KH-12 that required a shuttle.
stadler@Apple.COM (Andy Stadler) (12/14/88)
In article <2531@udccvax1.acs.udel.EDU> anderer@vax1.acs.udel.EDU (David G Anderer) writes: > >Other points made are that the KH-12 has a *large* maneuvering fuel >capacity, so the 57 degree limitation from Kennedy could be overcome. > I recall reading that the KH-12's could be refueled. Which leads to: Question: If LaCrosse uses its manuevering systems to boost itself to a >57 degree orbit, how could the <max 57> orbiters match it for a fueling operation...?? Sorry if that's a silly question... I don't know much about orbits... Actually, I suppose the bird could use its last amounts of fuel to return to a shuttle-capable orbit; but this gives a you failure mode where the sattelite loses manuevering capability while >57, and is thus unrecoverable. --Andy Stadler stadler@apple.com
wats@scicom.alphacdc.com (Bruce Watson) (12/15/88)
In article <2531@udccvax1.acs.udel.EDU>, anderer@vax1.acs.udel.EDU (David G Anderer) writes: > [many good points, deleted] > Other points made are that the KH-12 has a *large* maneuvering fuel > capacity, so the 57 degree limitation from Kennedy could be overcome. > The change from a 57 degree LEO to a 94.5 degree LEO would require a *lot* of fuel. The inclination requires considerably more energy to change` than any other orbital element.