Flaming Space Junk Narrowly Misses Airliner

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Most stuff burns up when it enters the atmosphere. All the junk just orbiting the earth has to be tracked and is a threat to anything in orbit, manned or unmanned.

[William33 110]

Most stuff burns up when it enters the atmosphere. All the junk just orbiting the earth has to be tracked and is a threat to anything in orbit, manned or unmanned.

Attention is drawn to the following article by the OP.

Flaming space junk from a Russian satellite narrowly missed hitting a Chilean airliner over the Pacific Ocean, reports said Wednesday.

The pilot of a LAN Chile Airbus A340 en route to New Zealand told air traffic controllers he had seen pieces of flaming space junk falling about eight kilometres (four miles) in front of the plane and behind it, TV3 said.

The aircraft was not struck by any of the debris and later landed safely in Auckland.

Airways New Zealand, which manages New Zealand's air traffic, said it had been warned by Russian authorities that an obsolete satellite was due to fall into the Pacific Ocean on Wednesday.

But the debris had apparently fallen into the area 12 hours earlier than the time advised by the Russians.

A spokesman for the Civil Aviation Authority, which is responsible for air safety, said it would launch an inquiry after it was advised of the details of the incident.

Early warning and tracking? Not hardly.

[Niels Bohr 72]

This is poor old Russia we're talking about that's keeping track. Their technology is maybe a little outdated.

[Dr_LHA 3]

I understand what you are saying and fully support the cost-benefit analysis mentality.

"Mentality" sounds like its a bad thing. Its important to realise that when I said that I meant that it would waste a lot of money and resources to absolutely no benefit. So cost/benefit is basically infinity!

I only wonder if some of the mysteriously downed airliners of the past or any future incidents, possibly related to space trash, would not cause uproar. Most issues do.

Haha - no. Are you serious about this? The chances of that happening are very small. In this case the pilot saw the debris. That's a long way off being hit by it. I've seen plenty of meteorites for example, but how many have actually hit me?

[William33 110]

I understand what you are saying and fully support the cost-benefit analysis mentality.

"Mentality" sounds like its a bad thing. Its important to realise that when I said that I meant that it would waste a lot of money and resources to absolutely no benefit. So cost/benefit is basically infinity!

I only wonder if some of the mysteriously downed airliners of the past or any future incidents, possibly related to space trash, would not cause uproar. Most issues do.

Haha - no. Are you serious about this? The chances of that happening are very small. In this case the pilot saw the debris. That's a long way off being hit by it. I've seen plenty of meteorites for example, but how many have actually hit me?

About the same probability of hitting the lottery, though some people do!!!

[Dr_LHA 3]

About the same probability of hitting the lottery, though some people do!!!

Actually you are more likely to win the lottery than be hit by a metorite. The chances of being hit by a meteorite are estimatedd at around 1 billion to 1. Lottery odds range from 50 - 150 million to 1.

Edited March 29, 2007 by dr_lha

[William33 110]

About the same probability of hitting the lottery, though some people do!!!

Actually you are more likely to win the lottery than be hit by a metorite. The chances of being hit by a meteorite are estimatedd at around 1 billion to 1. Lottery odds range from 50 - 150 million to 1.

Perhaps those odds are accurate, perhaps not. This coming from the son of a very senior, yet retired NASA aeronautical engineer. My father believes that one day, space trash will become a problem. It has to do with material makeup of the satellites, and their resistance to atmospheric heat.

The truth lies somewhere within those figures.

[Niels Bohr 72]

I can't wait to get a job at NASA!

[Dr_LHA 3]

Perhaps those odds are accurate, perhaps not. This coming from the son of a very senior, yet retired NASA aeronautical engineer. My father believes that one day, space trash will become a problem. It has to do with material makeup of the satellites, and their resistance to atmospheric heat.

I believe that Space Trash will definitely be a problem, but its mainly dangerous to things in orbit, rather than us on the ground (or even in airplanes).

By the way: My Dad didn't work for NASA, but I do.

Edited March 29, 2007 by dr_lha

[William33 110]

Perhaps those odds are accurate, perhaps not. This coming from the son of a very senior, yet retired NASA aeronautical engineer. My father believes that one day, space trash will become a problem. It has to do with material makeup of the satellites, and their resistance to atmospheric heat.

I believe that Space Trash will definitely be a problem, but its mainly dangerous to things in orbit, rather than us on the ground (or even in airplanes).

By the way: My Dad didn't work for NASA, but I do.

Well, I will not reveal my fathers name online, because that would reveal my true identity.

However, I will supply it in a PM if you are interested. I guarantee you will know of him. A NASA legend.

[Dr_LHA 3]

You don't have to reveal your secret identity!

However - back to the original story at hand, it turns out that these debris were not from this Russian satellite, but most likely meteors. The "Russian Satellite" in question, was actually a Progress 23P that was restocking the ISS. It actually didn't even fire its rockets to start its controlled re-entry until 12 hours after the incident with the plane, so there's basically no chance of this incident being related to the Russian vehicle.

So, ####### reporting as usual. If the pilot was in fact seeing a meteor shower, well there's not much we can really do about that can we?

Edited March 29, 2007 by dr_lha

[William33 110]

You don't have to reveal your secret identity!

However - back to the original story at hand, it turns out that these debris were not from this Russian satellite, but most likely meteors. The "Russian Satellite" in question, was actually a Progress 23P that was restocking the ISS. It actually didn't even fire its rockets to start its controlled re-entry until 12 hours after the incident with the plane, so there's basically no chance of this incident being related to the Russian vehicle.

So, ####### reporting as usual. If the pilot was in fact seeing a meteor shower, well there's not much we can really do about that can we?

PM sent.

The press sucks, indeed.