Meteorite Explodes Over Russia Injures Hundreds
- Thread starter Kaigen
- Start date
Pashalis said:
I think that it was spotted on the Tuesday, at least according to the eyewitnesses there AND only posted on the Friday. Here is the relevant bit from the article carried on sott:
http://www.sott.net/article/258527-Confirmed-Fireball-exploded-over-Cuba-last-week-Shock-wave-shook-buildings-caused-panic
Edit:From the context it is obvious that it refers to 8:00pm
paralleloscope
The Living Force
I recognize the clip and image from this article, a 2010 event I think. And I don't think it was cuba, aren't those trafficlights US style?Pashalis said:
EDIT: That type of trafficlights are used in Cuba it appears, the scene and framing I remember may just be very similar.
Deployment of a satellite system to provide early warning and extremely accurate track/prediction of this class of objects with today's (and yesterday's for that matter) technology is straightforward and not very costly (relative to other sat systems). The easiest way (from a US standpoint) is to append Space Command's mission with these requirements so that the $$ can be allocated for acquisition.
The technology associated with the optics, focal plane array, tasking, etc has been demonstrated in space and is fully space-qualified. An early prototype of the type of spacecraft I'm referring to was flown in 1996 and developed by Lincoln Labs (described here: _http://www.ll.mit.edu/publications/journal/pdf/vol11_no2/11_2space.pdf). It was still performing this track mission when I retired in 2008.
These kinds of systems (and their ground-based counterparts) are designed to track objects in earth orbit as part of the US Space Surveillance Network (SSN). But they can just as easily be tasked to detect Tunguska-class objects a very long ways away, giving plenty of warning/time to take cover (short of a massive ground burst).
The way you get the accuracy/prediction power is to use two or more sats to synchronously detect and downlink detections from the focal plane array. Ground or on-board processing produces the track of the object. By taking multiple (stereo) measurements as the sats rotate, your track becomes extremely accurate. You can cover a huge amount of volumetric search space in this way in a short period of time. For objects that are very far from earth, you will need to combine tracks over several days or weeks - but that is no problem.
The point is that all of this can easily be done.
In the years before I retired, I participated in several satellite architecture studies to design optimum multi-orbit systems for this kind of detection/tracking. On several occasions I made the government aware that such systems could detect/track incoming asteroids/debris essentially for "free" (with minor changes in tasking/processing) - this due to Laura's earlier work that I was familiar with. This generally fell on deaf ears since there was no vetted "requirement" to do so. General Worden (as Laura has mentioned) was the only govie to show any interest.
Anyway, with this Russian airburst, I suspect that there may be some quick work being done as Space Command to define a new set of "requirements" and get a new sat program off the ground.
The technology associated with the optics, focal plane array, tasking, etc has been demonstrated in space and is fully space-qualified. An early prototype of the type of spacecraft I'm referring to was flown in 1996 and developed by Lincoln Labs (described here: _http://www.ll.mit.edu/publications/journal/pdf/vol11_no2/11_2space.pdf). It was still performing this track mission when I retired in 2008.
These kinds of systems (and their ground-based counterparts) are designed to track objects in earth orbit as part of the US Space Surveillance Network (SSN). But they can just as easily be tasked to detect Tunguska-class objects a very long ways away, giving plenty of warning/time to take cover (short of a massive ground burst).
The way you get the accuracy/prediction power is to use two or more sats to synchronously detect and downlink detections from the focal plane array. Ground or on-board processing produces the track of the object. By taking multiple (stereo) measurements as the sats rotate, your track becomes extremely accurate. You can cover a huge amount of volumetric search space in this way in a short period of time. For objects that are very far from earth, you will need to combine tracks over several days or weeks - but that is no problem.
The point is that all of this can easily be done.
In the years before I retired, I participated in several satellite architecture studies to design optimum multi-orbit systems for this kind of detection/tracking. On several occasions I made the government aware that such systems could detect/track incoming asteroids/debris essentially for "free" (with minor changes in tasking/processing) - this due to Laura's earlier work that I was familiar with. This generally fell on deaf ears since there was no vetted "requirement" to do so. General Worden (as Laura has mentioned) was the only govie to show any interest.
Anyway, with this Russian airburst, I suspect that there may be some quick work being done as Space Command to define a new set of "requirements" and get a new sat program off the ground.
QuantumLogic
Jedi
Russian meteor blast 'heard' around the world
http://www.sott.net/article/258531-Russian-meteor-blast-heard-around-the-world
I read this just after the radio show was finished and something in it is far from being correct. Here's the quote in question-
I'm not sure if they are technically part of the CTBTO, but there are far more than 60 just in the US alone. Take a look at this-
And that image is not even complete. Most of the stations in the western US are not in that picture, as they are part of a different network. From looking at the ANF website, it would seem that ALL of the locations listed above have some level of infrasound monitoring. From what I have read about them, most seismic monitoring stations can detect infrasound as well.
What got me wondering about this was a couple comments made in the Russian meteor thread about hearing an oscillating sound from (or during) the explosion. It occurred to me from Laura's research that since there are people who report hearing these as they enter the atmosphere, wouldn't it be possible for the infrasound detectors to pick up the subsonic waveform as well, thereby providing- albeit a short one- a warning to those in the area?
Just a thought...
http://www.sott.net/article/258531-Russian-meteor-blast-heard-around-the-world
I read this just after the radio show was finished and something in it is far from being correct. Here's the quote in question-
I'm not sure if they are technically part of the CTBTO, but there are far more than 60 just in the US alone. Take a look at this-
And that image is not even complete. Most of the stations in the western US are not in that picture, as they are part of a different network. From looking at the ANF website, it would seem that ALL of the locations listed above have some level of infrasound monitoring. From what I have read about them, most seismic monitoring stations can detect infrasound as well.
What got me wondering about this was a couple comments made in the Russian meteor thread about hearing an oscillating sound from (or during) the explosion. It occurred to me from Laura's research that since there are people who report hearing these as they enter the atmosphere, wouldn't it be possible for the infrasound detectors to pick up the subsonic waveform as well, thereby providing- albeit a short one- a warning to those in the area?
Just a thought...
sitting said:
The loss of Air France flight 447 was thoroughly studied after the flight recorders were recovered, and it was rather convincingly concluded that cockpit crew error was the cause of that fatal crash, principally due to the copilot's instinctive, but tragically wrong, reaction to pull back on the stick in response to the instruments' display that the plane was losing altitude. The final accident report is fascinating, in a macabre sort of way, because it sets forth the horrifying chain of minor equipment malfunctions, seemingly benign cockpit crew oversights and ultimately the catastrophic errors that resulted in literally flying that airplane into the ocean.
No bomb onboard, random meteor impact, intervention of any UFO or ultradimensional entity had anything to do with it. Instead, the report concluded that the command crew was so reliant on the automation of the Airbus airframe and so unfamiliar with basic manual control procedures that they did exactly the wrong thing for too long, thereby failing to recover from the plane's stall, and didn't realize their mistake until it was too late.
For those who imagine that the US government and its complicit media are covering up, downplaying or spinning the Russian meteor strike, nothing like any those reactions seems to have been imposed. At least not in my region. Here's a link to a reaction from a local meteorologist (that is, weather man) that was published today, and it's fairly accurate and matter of fact in its presentation. http://www.kgw.com/community/blogs/weather/This-weeks-Asteroid-and-Russian-meteorite-191592601.html
We should ask the guy who draws the online comic strip XKCD to work up a What If physics analysis of how bad a cometary or asteroid strike could be. Read his first What If piece, it's a riot, and it is entitled "Relativistic Baseball". He's just the man for this assignment, I believe.
We should ask the guy who draws the online comic strip XKCD to work up a What If physics analysis of how bad a cometary or asteroid strike could be. Read his first What If piece, it's a riot, and it is entitled "Relativistic Baseball". He's just the man for this assignment, I believe.
sitting
Dagobah Resident
And here's the relevant passage from Laura's session dated June 9, 2009:
Q: (L) Questions? (J) What caused the destruction of the Air France flight?
A: Cometary explosion of the Tunguska variety though higher and a bit smaller.
Plus a follow up remark to punctuate what lies ahead:
A: A ticket to 5D naturally! They chose the exit at some level. The days will come when the dead seem blessed.
Q: (L) Questions? (J) What caused the destruction of the Air France flight?
A: Cometary explosion of the Tunguska variety though higher and a bit smaller.
Plus a follow up remark to punctuate what lies ahead:
A: A ticket to 5D naturally! They chose the exit at some level. The days will come when the dead seem blessed.
Trending content
-
-
-
J
-
