Konflikti lähiavaruudessa


Greatest Leader
Lisää infoa Intian testistä ja siitä ohjuksesta.

India’s anti-satellite (A-SAT) mission was a top secret one, kept under wraps for nearly 31 months, Indian Defence News reports. Only a handful of scientists knew about it, which was codenamed ‘Project XSV-1.’ For the rest of the team, it was another BMD (Ballistic Missile Defence) campaign, with some upgrades. None knew that a space strike or a ‘kinetic kill’ was in the offing.

The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) officials were told to maintain top secrecy about the project soon after Prime Minister Narendra Modi gave the go-ahead sometime in 2016. Propelled by PM’s go-ahead for the ‘kill’, the DRDO carefully scripted the flight path for one of the top-priority and secret military missions of the millennium. DRDO was told in no uncertain terms that at no point any details about A-SAT missions will be shared on public domain or spoken about. Missile scientists making presentations at various seminars were told to be ‘sure’ about the content that was going out on the public domain, Indian Defense News reports. None knew that A-SAT was in the making, barring a few. There were only six core members who knew what ‘Project XSV-1’ was all about. (The ‘SV’ apparently meant Shakti Vehicle and ‘1’ stood for the first mission.)

After the NDA government came to power in 2014, the DRDO top brass was warned officially many times not to divulge ‘too many details’ pertaining to sensitive strategic missions. Frequent directions went from the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office) and NSA’s office to stay low-key on national missions. The government wanted all ministries, including MoD (Ministry of Defence), to follow strict guidelines when it came to information decimation. Internally, the DRDO is said to have completely camouflaged the mission and almost everyone believed that it was an exo-atmospheric interceptor missile, part of the larger BMD program.

The last six months (end of September, 2018, to March, 2019) were crucial for the A-SAT mission. The DRDO teams were growing in confidence and all proven technologies were carefully scrutinised and fault lines drawn. The missile weighed around 18 tonnes with a height of around 13 metres. It pulverised the Microsat-R, weighing one tonne, within almost three minutes (168 seconds) after the launch.
Viimeksi muokattu:


Greatest Leader
India’s destruction of one of its satellites has been labelled a “terrible thing” by the head of Nasa, who said the missile test created 400 pieces of orbital debris and posed a threat to astronauts onboard the International Space Station (ISS).

Jim Bridenstine was addressing employees five days after India shot down a low-orbiting satellite in a missile launch that it says elevated the country to the elite tier of space powers.

The satellite shattered into pieces, many of which are dangerously large but too small to track, Bridenstine said. “What we are tracking right now, objects big enough to track – we’re talking about 10cm (six inches) or bigger – about 60 pieces have been tracked.”

The Indian satellite was destroyed at a relatively low altitude of 180 miles (300km), well below the ISS and most satellites in orbit.

But 24 of the pieces were going above the ISS, said Bridenstine. “That is a terrible, terrible thing to create an event that sends debris at an apogee that goes above the International Space Station,” he said, adding: “That kind of activity is not compatible with the future of human spaceflight.”

Viimeksi muokattu:


Greatest Leader
270 sivua oikeustieteellistä aineistoa jenkkien tic-tac tapauksesta.

While not precise, it shows that the “Tic-Tac” due to it's size, estimated distance and lack of aerodynamic details in the ATFLIR image and by calculating it's average velocity and acceleration, along with the power requirements to perform these maneuvers, it cannot be any known type of aircraft using current technology.

The final conclusion is that the “Tic-Tac” cannot be another F/A- 18 due to the lack of identifiable wing's and air-frame characteristics, further since during the 2004 Nimitz aerial exercise the only planes in the area were F/A-18s and an E2 radar plane and neither of these could produce the results seen. This is an unidentified object with characteristics that are beyond our current understanding

Kuten sanoin UFOilla on teknologinen ylivoima


Greatest Leader
Poissa silmistä, poissa mielestä.

Sillä ajatuksella ihmiskunta on viime vuosikymmeninä onnistunut saastuttamaan meren muovilla ja ilmakehän kasvihuonekaasuilla – ja planeettamme ympäristön avaruusromulla.

Avaruuteen on lauottu maapallolta tavaraa kuuden vuosikymmenen ajan. Planeettamme ympärillä viuhtoo vinhaa vauhtia jo aikamoinen kaatopaikka, ja lisää uhkaa tulla.

Elämänmenomme perustuu yhä enemmän satelliitteihin, mutta kuinka kauan niitä mahtuu turvallisesti romun sekaan?

Suurimpana romuna avaruudessa rapautuu yli kolme tuhatta toimintansa lopettanutta satelliittia. Viime viikolla Intia näytti sotilasmahtiaan hajottamalla yhden omistaan ohjuksella.

Ohjuksista ei ole ratkaisuksi, sillä rikki räsäytetyn satelliitin sirpaleet lähtevät omille teilleen aiheuttamaan lisää vaaraa. Intia vastasi arvostelijoilleen satelliitin olleen niin matalalla, että Maan vetovoima siivoaa romun pian ilmakehään, jossa se tuhoutuu.

Selitys ei kelvannut esimerkiksi Yhdysvaltain avaruushallinnolla Nasalle, joka havaitsi, että romua sinkoutui sittenkin myös poispäin Maasta. Niissä korkeuksissa on muun muassa kansainvälinen avaruusasema ISS.


Greatest Leader
The U.S. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center and a consortium of tech firms led by Raytheon are modernizing and simplifying the legacy Space Defense Operations Center, a 1990s-era system that tracks and monitors space debris.

Dave Fuino, program director for Raytheon Intelligence, Information and Services, said: "Within just a few months we brought together a team, developed the technology to modernize it, got it on contract and held a series of demos to prove it worked. We went from concept to proving the solution in less than a year, which is really remarkable."

The SPADOC system reached the end of its planned service life. The U.S. Air Force is planning to replace it with modern systems that will simplify operations and provide greater space situational awareness and collision avoidance capabilities. However, the new system won't come online for several years.

"SPADOC provides critical space-tracking capabilities that we must sustain and maintain while we wait for new systems to come online," said Bob Taylor, U.S. Air Force Legacy Space Branch chief. "At the same time, it's critical that we address the obsolescence risk of an aging SPADOC system. So we came up with a really innovative, modern solution to this problem."

Raytheon and AFLCMC decided to emulate SPADOC's capabilities with modern computer hardware. The new emulated environment, SPADOC Emulation Analysis Risk Reduction, known as SPEARR, is designed to provide a more sustainable system that requires less maintenance. The new hardware will provide the same functionality as today's system, making it easy to learn and operate.

Additional benefits are significant reductions in power and cooling consumption. Most of these reductions are because all of SPADOC's capabilities are now integrated into two small server racks instead of spread over 1,000 square feet of an ageing, analogue computer system.

"We used proven emulation technology to help solve our challenge, significantly reducing obsolescence risk," said Taylor. "Innovations in programmatic and technical approaches drove a smarter, better and faster solution. The next step is to evaluate options for fielding SPEARR."

"Between the experience of our NORAD teammates, a.i. solutions, Zivaro and E and M Technologies, and leading emulation companies Fundamental Software and M2 Technologies, we addressed the ageing SPADOC system. It's a game changer," said Fuino.


Greatest Leader
To see Tim Ellis hunched over his laptop, alone in a room at a major space industry conference in Colorado, you can hardly imagine that he might be the next Elon Musk.

But Relativity Space, the company he co-founded in December 2015 with the vision of launching 3D-printed rockets, has grown from 14 to 80 employees in one year and will recruit another 40 this year.

At age 28, Ellis has lured several industry veterans, including from SpaceX, the US market leader for launches that was founded by billionaire entrepreneur Musk.

Relativity Space has raised $45 million so far, Canadian satellite operator Telesat has entrusted it with the launch of part of its future 5G satellite constellation and the US military has given it a launch pad at Cape Canaveral.

And Ellis, who six years ago was still studying for his masters in aerospace engineering at the University of Southern California, now sits on the White House's National Space Council along with former astronauts and the heads of the largest American aerospace groups.

"I'm the youngest person by more than 20 years, and we're the only venture capital backed start-up," Ellis told AFP during the 35th annual Space Symposium in Colorado Springs, a major annual event for the space industry that will welcome 15,000 participants from 40 countries.

Dozens of start-ups have announced plans in recent years to build small and medium rockets to launch small satellites. Many will probably fail before having made their first rocket, but that's the game, Ellis explained.

"The notion in Silicon Valley is you're going to take tons of big bets, where lots of them will totally lose money. But the ones that succeed will pay for all of the losers -- and in a huge outcome, if it's the next Google or the next SpaceX," he said.

Relativity Space, which like SpaceX is based in Los Angeles, has so far printed nine rocket engines and three second stages for its rocket model, called Terran 1, whose first test flight is scheduled for the end of 2020.

- Small satellites -

With its large 3D-printing machines, the startup claims that its rockets will require 100 times fewer parts than traditional rockets.

"We'll only be experts in like two or three (technological) processes," he said, compared to traditional manufacturing with complex supply chains. "It's far easier."

Only the electronics are not 3D-printed.

"It's much cheaper, because of the labor reduction in the automation with 3D-printing," said Ellis, who will charge $10 million for a launch, at least at first.

"Also, it's more flexible," he said: eventually, Relativity Space will adapt the size of the fairings of the rockets to the requirements of individual customers, depending on the size of their satellite.

Speed is the other advantage: "Our target is to get from raw material to flight in 60 days," Ellis said.

If Relativity Space succeeds in this feat -- which it has not yet demonstrated -- it would revolutionize the launch industry. Today, a satellite operator can wait for years before having a place in the large rockets of Arianespace or SpaceX.

The Terran 1 will be 10 times smaller the SpaceX Falcon 9, able to place a 1,250 kilogram (2,755 pounds) payload into very low orbit (185 kilometers or 115 miles above the Earth's surface).

This could be suitable for a constellation of small satellites for telecommunications or imaging the Earth, but also for one of the largest customers in space: the US military.

This is another reason for the young executive's arrival in Colorado Springs: meeting senior Pentagon officials.

"I rarely wear a suit, but I will for the military," Ellis said.

Pentagon shoppailemassa.


Greatest Leader
At tens of thousands of kilometers above the Earth, a Russian satellite slowly approached the French-Italian satellite Athena-Fidus in October 2017, a move France later denounced as "an act of espionage."

What is less widely known is that just a few days before that, the same Russian satellite -- known as Luch or Olymp-K -- had been approached by an American military satellite named GSSAP, which came to within 10 kilometers (six miles) of it.

Since 2010, China has also demonstrated an ability to pilot satellites to approach designated targets.

These discreet maneuvers are just the most real sign of the militarization of space, several US experts told AFP.

The United States, Russia and China are certainly capable of destroying enemy satellites using missiles, and probably by deliberate collision too. They may also be developing lasers to blind or damage satellites.

But none of these types of attacks have ever happened in the six decades that humans have been venturing into space.

The real space war is about jamming, hacking and cyber means, rather than blowing things up in orbit.

"It's not an immediate collision threat," said Brian Weeden, director of program planning at Secure World Foundation, who has written a report on the movements of those satellites and other space threats.

"My sense is that all of that stuff is being done for intelligence and surveillance purposes, that those close approaches are being done to take pictures of those satellites to figure out what they're doing, or to listen in on what signals are being broadcast up to them."

US President Donald Trump earlier ordered speeding up the programme to take American astronauts back to the Moon, setting 2024 as the new deadline. Vice President Mike Pence has called the new lunar mission a "next giant leap" in an apparent reference to Neil Armstrong's famous words.

The head of Russia's Roscosmos State Corporation for Space Activities, Dmitry Rogozin, said that the usefulness of a new US Moon landing mission remains in question, unless it is a cover-up for some "undeclared missions".

"If they have already been there [on the Moon] then what's the point? To repeat a 50-year-old achievement? Of course we understand that, as in previous decades, such space missions are often just a cover-up [...]. Space doesn't always have to be civilian", he said.


Greatest Leader
The US is arguably the brightest example, with the world's greatest economy, having famously announced plans to engage in a fresh space race. According to Dr Gbenga Oduntan, the US' space intentions are just a decisive move of the Trump administration to make a storm in a teacup by artificially launching a race:

"I'm afraid I'll have to agree with some contemporary commenters who seem to think that this is just opportunism by the current administration of the US, who are trying to engineer a race where there is none", the commenter noted, adding that this is a drive to make the Congress earmark money for a mission "that might even end up being impossible in the time frame, but the money would've been released and spent". He remarked that there are "satanic verses to the current plans of the United States of America, particularly in space".

"So in a sense, space is now the new military industrial complex", he concluded, dwelling on the US' ambitions to rattle the sabre, yet noting that contrary to the US, China has demonstrated that its Moon programme boils down to mere research:

"China's activities on the Moon, to the extent that we have seen, are quite clearly on the surface on the side of the Moon we've not been to before or seen before, they would want to have a presence on the Moon, a robotic presence, experimental and otherwise, but narrowing this down to just a manned mission on the Moon", Oduntan argued.

He has called out the "dramatic" project, which does not provide any "excitement" for humans:

"Anyway, we wouldn't sit in the driving seat of the American administration, we don't know what they consider important, but from where we sit as an international space lawyer, this is not exciting, I don't see the excitement there, even for space scientists", Oduntan revealed.

He specified that "the excitement" that researchers would wish for lies in the opportunities that space offers to solve human issues:

"There are 1,001 things that we still need to perfect, from tele-medicine, to the use of space for rescue missions, to disaster management, there's so many ways space observation is useful, these are the ways where we think, at least the scientists, the lawyers; we think we should be seeing progress, not in dramatic missions that tend to buttress the political fortunes of current politicians", the academic commented on the Lunar project, which is expected to be funded in part by the government, thus out of taxpayers' pockets, and by private sponsors alike.

The latter may meanwhile comprise military advocates, in line with the US' extensive lobbying practices carried out by dozens of influential interest groups. Voluntary organisations designed to support a specific branch of the American military have historically existed in the United States, with the nation's oldest military lobbying association being the National Guard Association (NGA). This one, along with several others like The Association of the US Army (AUSA) and The Air Force Association (AFA), were meant to draw public attention to a whole range of military issues, as well as bring up certain topics for debate in Congress.


Greatest Leader
Today the U.S. has more than 400 military, government and commercial satellites circling the globe in geosynchronous Earth orbit, or GEO, a celestial path about 22,000 miles above the ground. These high-altitude satellites are ideal for telecommunications, meteorology and certain military applications, but when they break down, it’s nearly impossible to fix something far out in the cosmos.

Enter space robots.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency believes space-based robots offer the best bet for inspecting and repairing high-altitude satellites, especially with the number of satellites set to skyrocket due to a budding Space Force and federal agencies and industry ramping up operations in outer space.


Greatest Leader
WASHINGTON — Lawmakers have pointed out a glaring omission in the Trump administration's plan to establish a Space Force: It does not create a Space National Guard.

"The Department of Defense has not yet decided what role the Guard and Reserve will play in this new service," Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Jack Reed (D-R.I.) told DoD officials during a hearing April 11 on the administration's Space Force proposal.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said he was surprised to hear from committee staff that DoD was "not really sure what the reserve components role would be" and that those decisions would be pushed until after the Space Force is stood up. He questioned why DoD is asking lawmakers to vote on a proposal that does not have a "real plan for a National Guard or reserve."

In response, Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said: "It is impossible for me to imagine a Space Force without a reserve component."


Greatest Leader
The Drive kirjoitti pitkän artikkelin Nimitzin Tic Tac keissistä ja jenkki laivaston uudesta UAP/USO ohjeistuksesta. Artikkelin sisällä todistaja videoita.

In recent years, from what we can tell, in part by the reporting done by The War Zone itself, is that there is no real way to distinctly classify something like a UFO or USO in such a way that it gets reported and an investigation occurs on an official level within the military. This appears to be true for civilian government institutions, like the FAA, as well. The lack of a structured procedure and classification system, and the nebulous fear of being stigmatized by reporting things like UFOs—something that has long plagued the military and private sectors alike—has repressed the conveyance of information in unquantifiable, but hugely significant ways.

This reality has led to much speculation, and rightfully so, that the military knows far more about these strange happenings than they are willing to let on, at least on the surface. Otherwise, why wouldn't they want to know more about intruders wielding fantastic technology that makes them impervious to existing countermeasures and defenses?

Now all this appears to be changing on a grand level, but why?

If the Pentagon really doesn't know what these things are or where they come from, after so many years of sightings and odd encounters and its own studies and shadowy probes, then that would be an unfathomable dereliction of duty considering they are, you know, tasked with keeping America safe from the foreign harm. But really, how can we believe the idea that the military has zero opinion on the matter. It seems like a laughable proposition at best. If there is anything they would have high interest in, it would be craft capable of decimating the enemy on a whim.

With all that being said, what does the Navy's move to change its procedures and rules in regards to reporting UFOs mean?

Nothing, at least not definitively.

Is it a case of one hand not knowing what the other hand is doing? Is it just a relevant move in this new era of heightened power competition with peer state adversaries? Or is somehow part of a broader information campaign with unidentified goals?

We can't say for sure, but a mix of all of those things and more is certainly possible. The reality is the entire narrative, and at times the lack thereof, on UFOs from the Department of Defense, is a total mess of contradictory statements and historical facts.

Whatever the truth is, the landscape when it comes to the U.S. government and its relation to unexplained objects in the sky and in our oceans is clearly changing.

To what end remains just as much a mystery as the fantastic vehicles themselves.


Greatest Leader
Extraterrestrials, take note: The U.S. Navy plans to set up an official reporting and investigative system that will monitor reports from its pilots about unidentified flying objects.

But while this "X-Files"-worthy operation sounds newsy, don't expect to hear details about it anytime soon. The Navy doesn't intend to make the data public, citing the privileged and classified information that these reports usually include, according to The Washington Post.

"Military aviation safety organizations always retain reporting of hazards to aviation as privileged information in order to preserve the free and honest prioritization and discussion of safety among aircrew," Joe Gradisher, a spokesman for the Office of the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare, told The Washington Post.

Toisin sanoen UFOt on todellisia ja jenkit kutsuvat sitä nykyään Unknown Aerial Phenomenom. He eivät halua siitä puhua, kun niille ei voi tehdä mitään vuosikymmenien kokeilujen jälkeen. Tämän rinnalla on USO tai USP eli Unknown Submerged Object tai Unknown Submerged Phenomenom, mistä laivasto ei halua sanoa mitään.


Greatest Leader
Ensin pentagon myöntää että he ovat tutkineet vuosikymmeniä UAPta, ja seuraavaksi NYT kirjoittaa vakavasti otettavan artikkelin aiheesta. Ehkä se salailu on loppumassa vihdoinkin

WASHINGTON — The strange objects, one of them like a spinning top moving against the wind, appeared almost daily from the summer of 2014 to March 2015, high in the skies over the East Coast. Navy pilots reported to their superiors that the objects had no visible engine or infrared exhaust plumes, but that they could reach 30,000 feet and hypersonic speeds.

“These things would be out there all day,” said Lt. Ryan Graves, an F/A-18 Super Hornet pilot who has been with the Navy for 10 years, and who reported his sightings to the Pentagon and Congress. “Keeping an aircraft in the air requires a significant amount of energy. With the speeds we observed, 12 hours in the air is 11 hours longer than we’d expect.”

In late 2014, a Super Hornet pilot had a near collision with one of the objects, and an official mishap report was filed. Some of the incidents were videotaped, including one taken by a plane’s camera in early 2015 that shows an object zooming over the ocean waves as pilots question what they are watching.

“Wow, what is that, man?” one exclaims. “Look at it fly!”
Viimeksi muokattu:

Osasto 31

The Drive kirjoitti tuosta kuukausi takaperin. Mainitsi kun joskus 2000-luvun alussa Lockheedin Skunkworks-osaston johtaja sanoi, että USA oli luonut 30-40 vuotta sitten asioita joita kenelläkään muulla ei vieläkään ole. Puhumattakaan projekteista jotka teoriassa toimivat, mutta jota ei voitu rakentaa teknologian kehittymättömyyden takia.


Greatest Leader
Mainitsi kun joskus 2000-luvun alussa Lockheedin Skunkworks-osaston johtaja sanoi, että USA oli luonut 30-40 vuotta sitten asioita joita kenelläkään muulla ei vieläkään ole.

Ysärillä. Silloin sanottiin että jenkeillä on labroja joissa on teknologiaa mikä on 20 - 30 vuotta edellä muita. Nyt se välimatka on kurottu umpeen, silti UAPt ja USOt on kaukana siitä teknologiasta mitä ihmiskunnalla on käytössä.


Respected Leader
The Drive kirjoitti tuosta kuukausi takaperin. Mainitsi kun joskus 2000-luvun alussa Lockheedin Skunkworks-osaston johtaja sanoi, että USA oli luonut 30-40 vuotta sitten asioita joita kenelläkään muulla ei vieläkään ole. Puhumattakaan projekteista jotka teoriassa toimivat, mutta jota ei voitu rakentaa teknologian kehittymättömyyden takia.

Kyseisen johtajan sanotaan vastanneen tarkennuskysymykseen, että heillä on kyky lähettää ET kotiin.
mitä ikinä tarkoittikaan.


Ysärillä. Silloin sanottiin että jenkeillä on labroja joissa on teknologiaa mikä on 20 - 30 vuotta edellä muita. Nyt se välimatka on kurottu umpeen, silti UAPt ja USOt on kaukana siitä teknologiasta mitä ihmiskunnalla on käytössä.
Onko sitten kuitenkaan niin kaukana? Pelkästään se että pystytään seurailemaan, havaitsemaan ja teorisoimaan osoittaa mielestäni sen että ei se "ylivertainen" teknologia ole niin kaukana enää, pitää vain keksiä että miten se onnistuu. Se että joku on sen jo tehnyt osoittaa että jotenkin se toimii.

Ottamatta kantaa siihen kuka tai ketkä tällaista teknologiaa pitää hallussaan :alien:, haluan sanoa että ihmisillä on uskomattoman hyvä kyky oppia asioita pelkästään näkemällä ja kokeilemalla. Ja tarvittava tekniikka kehitetään nopeasti kun tiedetään että se on mahdollista.

Siinä missä tuon teknologian kehitykseen on voinut mennä 60 vuotta, niin sen kopioimiseen ei tarvita kuin 20 vuotta.


Greatest Leader
Ottamatta kantaa siihen kuka tai ketkä tällaista teknologiaa pitää hallussaan :alien:, haluan sanoa että ihmisillä on uskomattoman hyvä kyky oppia asioita pelkästään näkemällä ja kokeilemalla. Ja tarvittava tekniikka kehitetään nopeasti kun tiedetään että se on mahdollista.

Totta, tuon toinen pointti mikä pitää ymmärtää ja samalla toinen pointti mikä tekee tästä asiasta tutkinnan arvoisen. Ymmärrän että silloin joskus piti kaikki salata, mutta jos he avaisivat tutkimuksiaan ja ongelmiaan näiden asioiden kanssa, niin asioista päästäisiin yhteisymmärrykseen.

Uskon että maailmalla on paljon ihmisiä, jotka voivat taikka haluavat painia näiden ongelmien kanssa ja jos jotakin pitää salata, niin se on ymmärrettävämpää kuin asian kokonainen kieltäminen ja salaaminen perinteisin konstein.


Onhan USA kunnostautunut omille vittuilussa, joten olen erittäin skeptinen kykenisikö kukaan samaan.

Siistiä tuo toki on.
Todellakin. Tämä video taitaa liittyä sekä aiheeseen että kommenttiin.

Blackbird testilentoa, joka siihen aikaan oli jo todella paljon edellä tavallisista hävittäjistä nopeudessa.