Satellite shot down by US Navy, What kind of message does this send?

Hello,

As you may have heard, a US Navy AEGIS warship, the USS Lake Erie, fired a single SM-3 missile which successfully intercepted and shot down an out of control satellite in space. The satellite had not yet entered the Earth's atmosphere.

Any thoughts or opinions on this achievement?

The official motive was to prevent the fuel tank, containing toxic fuel, from reaching the ground.

However, US Navy officials readily admitted that this was a good opportunity for them to test their anti-ballistic missile defense systems.

What kind of message does this send to hostile or rival governments, in your opinion?

P.S. All politics aside, from a strictly technical and scientific point of view, this was quite an impressive feat.

Thanks.

Hi Mabdesc; Yes I think this is a VERY significant event, and has passed with little attention. Thanks for bringing it up.

Some observers seem to think we have long ago entered a new battlefield, in which there are at least two fronts 1.) high space (orbital) and 2.) the suborbital domain of re-entry vehicles and ballistic missles.

Last week's could be seen as the U.S. response to the Chinese "shot" last year in which the Chinese military destroyed a high orbit satellite (Another event that has not gotten much attention).

I think the the U.S. satellite destroyed was suborbital, and so maybe not as great a technical achievment as that of the Chinese? There doesn't seem to be a great deal of information available on the details?

Obviously, destruction of communication satellites would be a knockout blow for any modern military.

In turn, effective ABM's could mean the elimination of an adversary's nuclear capability. In the case of countries with few missles, even a limited ABM defense could take them out of the game.

IMO, this is what is behind the Russian sensitivity to the proposed ABM systems in Eatern Europe. And is the real threat imposed by the modern Chinese military.

Meanwhile, we are focused on the last war; building aircraft carriers, high cost stealth bombers and the like. (The new Maginot line?).

cheers, anyway. cnfb

Hi Flyboy,

Thanks for replying. I agree with most of your statement, but I'd like to comment further on one of your points:

At first glance, these may appear as "last war" technologies, but if we look at the details, they're closely intertwined and involved with the upcoming "electronic communication warfare" era.

Aircraft carriers remain a huge projection of mobile military power in the world. In addition to fighter jets, they also have considerable radar-jamming and communication warfare capabilities.

Warships and other torpedo-boats: don't forget that the missile which shot down the satellite was fired from a warship.

Stealth bombers and fighters: I think this is an integral aspect of the new era of warfare. This era seems to revolve around neutralizing the opponent's hi-tech communication and radar network. This can be done either by destroying communications or by bypassing them.

Stealth bombers and fighters (hopefully) can bypass the opponent's radars and destroy targets.

It's kind of a 1-2 punch:
1. Shoot down incoming missiles and communication satellites.
2. Destryoing targets and radar/communication sites without being detected.

Just my 2 cents on the matter.

Take care.

At first glance, these may appear as "last war" technologies, but if we look at the details, they're closely intertwined and involved with the upcoming "electronic communication warfare" era.

Aircraft carriers remain a huge projection of mobile military power in the world. In addition to fighter jets, they also have considerable radar-jamming and communication warfare capabilities.

Warships and other torpedo-boats: don't forget that the missile which shot down the satellite was fired from a warship.

Stealth bombers and fighters: I think this is an integral aspect of the new era of warfare. This era seems to revolve around neutralizing the opponent's hi-tech communication and radar network. This can be done either by destroying communications or by bypassing them.

Stealth bombers and fighters (hopefully) can bypass the opponent's radars and destroy targets.

It's kind of a 1-2 punch:
1. Shoot down incoming missiles and communication satellites.
2. Destryoing targets and radar/communication sites without being detected.

Just my 2 cents on the matter.

Take care.

Good points.

Yet much of this this high tech stuff, it seems, can be countered with relatively low tech measures. Mortars and IED"S are about the most sophisticated weapons employed by the Iraq insurgency, but they have proved formidable.

What's worse is, it looks like this "asymetric warfare" will be the rule as simultaneously space weaponry, once the stuff of sci fi, becomes a fact.

I wouldn't want to be a military planner in this era.

cheers.