Aeronautics Industry

Jonathan · Guest

It appears the Chinese asat test has failed to persuade
the US to enter into talks over limiting the militarization
of space. I wonder if China will keep trying by ramping
up their capabilities and having more 'tests'?

April 23, 2007
U.S. Knew of China Missile Test, but Kept Silent
By MICHAEL R. GORDON and DAVID S. CLOUD

WASHINGTON, April 22 - After a Chinese interceptor smashed into a
target satellite in January, Bush administration officials criticized
the test as a destabilizing development.

It was the first successful demonstration of an antisatellite missile
by any country in more than 20 years. Pentagon officials warned that
the test had increased the threat to American satellites. Space
experts fretted that it had spawned a cloud of orbiting debris.
American diplomats complained to their counterparts in Beijing.

What administration officials did not say is that as the Chinese were
preparing to launch their antisatellite weapon, American intelligence
agencies had issued reports about the preparations being made at the
Songlin test facility. In high-level discussions, senior Bush
administration officials debated how to respond and even began to
draft a protest, but ultimately decided to say nothing to Beijing
until after the test.

Three months after the Chinese launching, a new debate has developed
as to whether the administration properly handled the episode or
missed an opportunity to discourage the Chinese from crossing a new
military threshold.

The events show that the administration felt constrained in its
dealings with China because of its view that it had little leverage to
stop an important Chinese military program, and because it did not
want to let Beijing know how much the United States knew about its
space launching activities.

"We did get warning that the test was being prepared," said a senior
administration official, who described the administration's thinking
in deciding not to ask the Chinese to cancel the test.

"I think it is fair to say that nobody knows whether the Chinese would
have deferred or canceled the test," the administration official
added. "The principals' best judgment, including the leadership of the
intelligence community, was that they were committed to testing the
antisatellite weapon."

But some experts outside government say that American officials might
have been able to discourage the Chinese from launching the missile,
had the officials been willing to enter into a broader discussion of
ways to regulate the military competition in space. China had long
advocated an agreement to ban weapons in space, an approach the Bush
administration has rejected in order to maintain maximum flexibility
for developing antimissile defenses.

"Had the United States been willing to discuss the military use of
space with the Chinese in Geneva, that might have been enough to
dissuade them from going through with it," said Jeffrey G. Lewis, an
arms control expert at the New America Foundation.

Dubbed the SC-19 by American intelligence, the Chinese antisatellite
weapon consists of a solid-fuel medium-range missile carrying an
interceptor that is designed to crash into enemy satellites. The
weapon is fired from a mobile launcher.

The United States had already detected two previous tests of the
system - on July 7, 2005, and Feb. 6, 2006. Neither struck a target.
In the second trial, the missile passed near a satellite, leaving
American officials unsure whether the goal had been to hit it, or
simply to pass nearby. In neither case did the Bush administration
complain to the Chinese, a senior official said.

In December 2006 and early January of this year, American intelligence
agencies picked up signs that preparations for a third Chinese
antisatellite test appeared to be under way. The mobile missile
launcher for the SC-19 was repeatedly detected on the Songlin pad,
according to American officials familiar with the classified reports.

In early January, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which
collects and analyzes reconnaissance information, also warned that an
SC-19 test was possible that month, American officials said.

The presumed target for the test was an old Chinese weather satellite
known as the Feng-Yun-1C. The United States Air Force was carefully
tracking the satellite on the day of the test, checking its location
six times that day instead of the normal two, according to Geoff
Forden, a research associate at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.

As the test preparations were under way, the Bush administration
pondered how to respond.

"There were discussions about different options of how to deal with a
potential test that was coming up, whether you démarche them early on,
whether you wait to see if they are successful, if they're not," said
Lt. Gen. Walter L. Sharp, the director of the staff under Gen. Peter
Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

<more>
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/23/washington/23satellite.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

Jonathan · Guest

This Chinese asat test needs a catchy name like Sputnik.
AC-19 doesn't cut it.

"There was a shock that the Russians had put a satellite
in orbit before us," Gen. T. Michael Moseley, the Air
Force chief of staff, said at a recent conference, "and
there's a similar shock that the Chinese successfully
shot down that satellite. It makes space astronomically
more dangerous than it was before."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/23/washington/23satellite.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

Let history record the US responded to the China Test
with a 'call to arms' rather than attempting to discuss
a new treaty on space weapons. It's kinda odd how
such dramatic historical events go by with hardly
a notice at the time they occur.

This is just one recent example. Another would be
the decision on where to take the space program
once it became obvious the shuttle was finished.
We chose the moon, instead of choosing to apply
the space program to our earthly needs such as
energy and climate change. We chose very badly
just as we have with the China Test.

Historic mistakes!

s

Craig Fink · Guest

NY Times quoted by Jonathan wrote:

....

Rand Simberg · Guest

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:08:16 GMT, in a place far, far away, Craig Fink
<WeBeGood@GMail.Com> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

Fred J. McCall · Guest

Craig Fink <WeBeGood@GMail.Com> wrote:

:
:So, China advocates an agreement to ban weapons in space, while the Bush
:administration rejects it.

The guy who's behind always wants a 'freeze' so that he can catch up.

:We have our own huge program to do essentially the same thing, ...

Wrong. Please point to said "huge program".

:knew about
:their test ahead of time, did nothing before, complained afterwards,
:essentially waited and used it as an excuse to continue doing what we are
:doing, just more of it and faster? Is that a good summary?

Only if you're a Chinese propaganda puppet.

:Who is the destabilizing factor? China or the United States of America?

The answer is obvious to anyone with a clue. The fact that you have
to ask the question shows that you are not a member of that company...

--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson

Jonathan · Guest

"Fred J. McCall" <fmccall@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5dgp23daha5lbb41pl0235ou5mfrjnf3fe@4ax.com...

Jonathan · Guest

"Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message
news:46c4bebd.1553998972@news.giganews.com...

Rand Simberg · Guest

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 10:43:29 -0400, in a place far, far away,
"Jonathan" <write@bellsouth.net> made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

kT · Guest

Jonathan wrote:

robert casey · Guest

Pat Flannery · Guest

Jonathan wrote:

OM · Guest

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:49:24 -0500, Pat Flannery <flanner@daktel.com>
wrote:

Alan Jones · Guest

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 20:23:42 GMT, robert casey <wa2ise@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:

Jonathan · Guest

"Pat Flannery" <flanner@daktel.com> wrote in message
news:132r6kpl6gp88dd@corp.supernews.com...