 Delta II launching USA-193, fromVandenberg Air Force Base, in December 2006 | |
| Names | NROL-21 NRO Launch 21 L-21 |
|---|---|
| Mission type | Reconnaissance radar imaging |
| Operator | National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) |
| COSPAR ID | 2006-057A |
| SATCATno. | 29651 |
| Mission duration | Communications with satellite not maintained after launch |
| Spacecraft properties | |
| Manufacturer | InitiallyBoeing, thenLockheed Martin |
| Launch mass | 2,300 kg (5,100 lb)[1][non-primary source needed] |
| Start of mission | |
| Launch date | 14 December 2006, 21:00:00UTC |
| Rocket | Delta II 7920-10 |
| Launch site | Vandenberg,SLC-2W |
| Contractor | United Launch Alliance |
| End of mission | |
| Disposal | Destroyed by heavily modified missile defence interceptor launched fromUSS Lake Erie (CG-70) |
| Destroyed | 21 February 2008 |
| Orbital parameters | |
| Reference system | Geocentric orbit |
| Regime | Low Earth orbit |
| Perigee altitude | 349 km (217 mi) |
| Apogee altitude | 365 km (227 mi) |
| Inclination | 58.48° |
| Period | 92.0 minutes |
USA-193, also known asNRO Launch 21 (NROL-21 or simplyL-21), was a United States militaryreconnaissance satellite (radar imaging) launched on 14 December 2006.[2] It was the first launch conducted by theUnited Launch Alliance (ULA).[3] Owned by theNational Reconnaissance Office (NRO), the craft's exact function and purpose wereclassified. On 21 February 2008, it was destroyed as a result ofOperation Burnt Frost.[4]
USA-193 was part of the NRO'sFuture Imagery Architecture (FIA), which was begun in 1997 to produce a fleet of inexpensive reconnaissance satellites, but has become the agency's most spectacular failure.[5] USA-193 was initially developed byBoeing, which won the contract in 1999, beating outLockheed Martin with proposals for innovative electro-optics and radar. But after cost overruns, delays, and parts failures, NRO sent the contract to Lockheed, which built USA-193 around the Boeing radar design.[5] Lockheed Martin and Boeing both supported the launch, the first in the joint effort known as theUnited Launch Alliance.[6] USA-193 weighed about 2,300 kg (5,100 lb),[1][non-primary source needed] with a body thought to be 4.6 m (15 ft) long and 2.4 m (7 ft 10 in) wide, estimates based on the maximal Delta II payload. With the radar antenna extended, USA-193 was about the size of a basketball court (~30 × 15 m).[7]
The satellite entered orbit, but lost contact with the ground within hours.[1][non-primary source needed] In late January 2008, reports from anonymous U.S. officials indicated a U.S. spy satellite, later confirmed as USA-193,[1] was in adeteriorating orbit and was expected to crash intoEarth within weeks.[14][15] This came as no surprise to amateursatellite watchers, who had been predicting the deorbit of the satellite for some time.[16]
The satellite malfunctioned shortly after deployment and was intentionally destroyed 14 months later on 21 February 2008 by a modifiedSM-3 missile fired from theU.S. Navy warshipUSSLake Erie (CG-70), stationed west ofHawaii.[17][18] The event highlighted growing distrust between the U.S. and China, and was viewed by some to be part of a wider "arms race" in space involving the U.S., China, and Russia.[19] It was the first launch byUnited Launch Alliance since it was formed in December 2006, and the firstDelta II launch since ULA acquisition.
TheFederal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) reports indicate that the satellite contained thehazardous materialshydrazine andberyllium.[20] Though there was some speculation that the satellite might have a "nuclear" power core,[21] i.e. aradioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG), the FEMA report indicates otherwise. On 29 January 2008, anAssociated Press story quotedU.S. Air Force GeneralGene Renuart as saying that contingency plans were being made, since intact pieces of the satellite "might re-enter into theNorth American area".[22] In respecting theSpace Liability Convention, the United States vowed to pay for any damage or destruction caused by their failed satellite.[23]
_aboard_the_guided_missile_cruiser_USS_San_Jacinto_(CG_56).jpg)
Planning for the destruction of USA-193 with a missile reportedly began on 4 January 2008, withPresident Bush approving the plan on 12 February 2008,[24] at an expected cost of US$40 million to US$60 million.[25] The task force had as its goal to "rupture the fuel tank to dissipate the approximately 453 kg (999 lb) of hydrazine, a hazardous fuel, which could pose a danger to people onEarth, before it entered into Earth's atmosphere".[4]
On 14 February 2008, U.S. officials announced the plan to destroy USA-193 beforeatmospheric reentry, stating that the intention was "saving or reducing injury to human life". They said that if the hydrazine tank fell to Earth, it "could spread a toxic cloud roughly the size of two football fields".[26] GeneralJames Cartwright confirmed that theUnited States Navy was preparing to launch anSM-3 missile to destroy the satellite, at an altitude of 247 km (153 mi), shortly before it entered Earth's atmosphere.[1][non-primary source needed]
On 21 February 2008, at 03:26UTC an SM-3 missile was fired from theTiconderoga-class missile cruiserUSS Lake Erie (CG-70) and intercepted USA-193 about 247 km (153 mi) above thePacific Ocean.[4] The satellite was traveling with a velocity of 28,000 km/h (17,000 mph), or 7.8 km/s (4.8 mi/s). The velocity of the impact was about 35,000 km/h (22,000 mph). TheUnited States Department of Defense (DoD) expressed a "high degree of confidence" that the fuel tank was hit and destroyed.[27] The satellite's remnants were expected to burn up over the course of the next 40 days, with most of the satellite's mass re-entering the atmosphere within 48 hours of the missile strike.[4][28]
U.S. officials denied that the action was intended to prevent sensitive technology falling into foreign hands[1] and also denied that it was a response to the2007 Chinese anti-satellite missile test.[29] This was not the first time the United States shot down one of its own satellites; the Air Forcehad shot down a satellite in 1985.[30] Although the U.S. had objected to the earlier Chinese test of ananti-satellite (ASAT) weapon, U.S. officials said there was "no parallel" with that test. The Chinese test destroyed a target in a high, stable orbit, leaving a large amount ofspace debris in orbit, while the destruction of USA-193 in a much lower orbit would create debris that would likely deorbit within weeks.[1][31][non-primary source needed]
The Russian government claimed that this exercise was a test of the U.S. missile defense program.[31] The defense ministry of Russia accused the U.S. of using hydrazine as a cover for the test of an ASAT. It also noted that extraordinary measures had never before been needed to deal with the many spacecraft that had fallen to Earth.[31] Indeed,The New York Times had paraphrasedGordon Johndroe, spokesman for theUnited States National Security Council, as stating that 328 objects had deorbited (controlled and uncontrolled) in the previous five-year period.[32]
However, U.S. officials maintained that the large quantity of hydrazine on board made USA-193 a special case.[1] According to GeneralKevin P. Chilton, when George Bush was briefed on the situation, the danger that shooting down the satellite would be perceived as an ASAT test was brought up, and Bush made his decision based on the dangers of an uncontrolled reentry.[33]
Other observers dismiss the threat of the hydrazine, suggesting that the effect of the cloud, when diluted over a large area, would likely be mild: "The hydrazine tank is a 1-meter sphere containing about 400 liters of hydrazine. The stated hazard area is about 2 hectares, something like 1/10,000,000,000 of the area under the orbit. The potential for actual harm is unbelievably small".[34] Other analyses, such as those cited by Yousaf Butt, show the hydrazine tank burning up in the upper atmosphere.[35][36][37]
Two examples of uncontrolled atmospheric re-entries causing (or almost causing) damage are the 1978 re-entry ofKosmos 954, a Soviet satellite, which landed in Canada and spread dangerous amounts of nuclear fuel from its onboardreactor over large tracts of land, andSkylab's 1979 re-entry, which rattled windows and dropped small pieces of debris onto buildings inEsperance,Western Australia (no significant monetary damage resulted, but the U.S. was symbolically fined US$400 for littering).[38] No weapon existed in 1978 to bring down Kosmos 954, and a Soviet anti-satellite weapon (part of theIstrebitel Sputnikov program), the first of its kind, was declared operational only ten days before Skylab re-entered the atmosphere, and was not capable of directing the space station's descent.
Before the destruction of USA-193,Pentagon officials repeatedly denied that it was meant to bolster the U.S. missile defense program. Six days after USA-193's destruction, Defense SecretaryRobert M. Gates said, "the mission's success shows that U.S. plans for a missile-defense system are realistic" though in the same statement it was claimed that the weapons and systems used for this mission will not retain their ASAT capability, and will be reconfigured back to their original purpose as tactical missiles.[39]
The destruction of USA-193 created 174 pieces of orbital debris that were cataloged by the U.S. military.[40] While most of this debris re-entered the Earth's atmosphere within a few months, a few pieces lasted slightly longer because they were thrown into higher orbits. The final piece of USA-193 debris (COSPAR 2006-057GH, SATCAT 35425) re-entered on 28 October 2009.[40]
The launch of at least one other satellite was postponed to avoid space debris from USA-193. AnAtlas V launch hot line recording indicated the debris would delay the launch of a different National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) satelliteUSA-200 (NROL-28) as "a precautionary measure".[41]
This article incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain.
| IMINT |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SIGINT |
| ||||||
| MASINT |
| ||||||
| R&D |
| ||||||
| Unknown |
| ||||||
