Not a meteor or asteroid, but...

[SpaceyKC]

         I was just at SpaceNStuff which had a link to CNN.com (Space.com has a story too) with an article that states that between now (actually last Thursday) and next Tuesday,  some debris from a 1996 spacecraft will be falling to earth!   :s01

         (I took so long posting this thing-getting cut off, etc.,  that it's probably already happened!  But if not,  heads up everyone!!  Because they don't know when or where it will land!)

          Any bets?   :s04

[SpaceyKC]

          Here are the articles:

  http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/04/05/satellite.drop/index.html  http://space.com/missionlaunches/missions/spacecraft_reentry_020405.html

            Hope they work!  

[Loonboy]

[blue]Some of us looking skyward for Ufos (you never know...  :s3 ) might get boshed on the head with a 33lb battery...

GREAT

Some estimates on the amount of loose space junk -- debris from space and satellite operations -- exceed 100,000 pieces near Earth or orbiting the planet.

Why is it that NASA and other superpower space programmes can get sophisticated machinery into orbit to provide astonishing images of distant galxies, first-rate weather tracking etc. but can't quite seem to work out when they're coming down again or where!!? Isn't this irresponsible?

It's bad enough that we're cluttering up our planet to the point of its demise without us starting on the neighbourhood too...

[/blue]

[SpaceyKC]

              LB,

       Maybe all those skeptics will give us credit for one thing: while looking for ufos,  we won't be surprised by an errant piece of space trash.

       You're right about it being irresponsible-I thought they at least kept track of (and control of) these things they send up!  :s01

               KC

[Homer]

Space junk is cool 8)

[Tommy]

"The re-entry is uncontrolled, and due to potential solar flux variations, time and location predictions will not be reliable until only a few hours before the re-entry event"

*GULP*  :s4

Heads up everyone!  

Tommy

:s8

[Druss]

I would have thought Homer that space junk comming home is going to be quite hot.

:s02

[Loonboy]

[blue]lol @ Druss

Hey Nora, skeptics might not be surprised at the sudden appearance of space debris hurling down from the sky, but can they side-step quickly enough to get out of the way?

:s9          :sc

One more skeptic bites the dust. Hooo hooo!

[/blue]

[SpaceyKC]

           Right on, LB!

             It would most likely BE a skeptic who would be standing there,  going,  'Well,  do you have real proof?'  :s2

[Homer]

Druss,

I stand corrected

Space junk is hot :sh

[Magikman]

Its not my intention to sound mean spirited guys, but how exactly can you deduce irresponsibility on anyone's part for this;

"The joint Argentine-U.S. project failed when the spacecraft did not detach from the final stage of the Pegasus rocket that launched it into space."

   This appears to be a unique situation because of the failure of the mission, and the resultant lack of control. This shouldn't be regarded as something that occurs normally. Its possible there will be consequences, but does that mean that because accidents will sometimes happen that anyone attempting these missions are irresponsible? Being that the earth is 75% water with another 5% of its land mass mostly uninhabitable, isn't the risk highly improbable? You have a much better chance of an airplane falling on you or being hit by lightening than any space debris, given the fact that most of it burns up upon reentry.

Magikman  :sg

[Tommy]

uh oh, Magik's tempting fate!  :s9 Better hide somewhere...  :s8

:s04

[Loonboy]

[blue]I'm not blaming them for the accident. That's life. What I am calling irresponsible is their seeming lack of provision for dealing with the consequences of this accident.

My car might break down. That's life. My responsibility is getting it back to a garage for repair or off the road so that it doesn't pose a threat to other road users. I wouldn't just leave it there and hope it goes away.

My provision is joining a car-breakdown recovery service.

I know that the AA or the RAC don't do space-recovery yet, but surely NASA and company could plan for steering their spacecraft back to earth safely in the event of a breakdown...? Or destroying it into small enough pieces that burn up completely on re-entry?

[/blue] :s3

[Druss]

they could have dished out tin hats as a precaution.

:s02

[SpaceyKC]

             Pyramid-shaped,  of course!!  ;D

[Druss]

Of Course!

;D ;D

[dalia]

I love you guys!  :s7  You all have such a sense of humor.

Magikman doesn't have to worry about tempting fate...he's got his own private spell-maker to protect him.  Or maybe that's spell-checker...better be careful, Magikman.  :s5

Well, irresponsible or not...Nasa should try to keep the debris to a mimimum. Those UFO's are having a difficult time dodging out there. And we might miss seeing the planet Niribu while we're ducking space debris.

Do the pyramid-shaped tin hats come in small? Aluminum might be better, though. It'll keep the secret government agents out of our thoughts, eh?

Keep the humor, y'all!  ;D

Dalia :sh

[Magikman]

LB,

 Its hard to say what provisions they make for all possible scenario's. I'm not a rocket scientist (no, really?) or builder, so I am unaware of the safety measures built into the rocket. They could have had a self-destruct mechanism, but the article states loss of control at the last stage separation. Did that mean it suffered a total system failure, electrical, guidance, etc? Its very possible, thus rendering any safety measure inoperative. The fact that the last stage is still attached to the satellite and the unintentional low orbit may have ruled out any attempted 'recovery'. NASA has successfully captured errant satellites before, CLICK HERE so they can't be thought of as totally irresponsible. Which brings up your analogy, which doesn't really apply here. Your car may break down, but you still maintain control over it to a certain extent. Its not going anywhere, and you can warn any approaching vehicle away. Try this scenario instead, you park your brand new car on the downhill side of Pikes Peak (elev. 14,000 feet). You get out of your car and walk to the observation platform. Suddenly, the parking brake fails, and your car begins its journey down the mountain. Have you made provisions for that? What control do you have now? Does that make you irresponsible for whatever may occur at the end of its destination? The similarities are reasonably comparable, don't you agree?

Magikman  :sg