Ahead of a UN meeting on reducing the threats of space junk, member states of the European Union, but not the EU itself, have pledged not to conduct destructive direct-ascent anti-satellite tests. The EU itself says they don't have the competencies to sign such a statement.
A "direct-ascent" anti-satellite weapon (DA-ASAT) is one designed to be launched from the ground directly to space in order to destroy a satellite.
In a document [pdf alert] recently published by the U.N. Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) on Reducing Space Threats, a “joint contribution” by the E.U. included a commitment by its 27 member states not to perform such ASAT tests, which can generate significant amounts of debris. Breaking Defense first reported on the document.
Both China and Russia have tested such systems. In November of 2021, Russia destroyed a defunct satellite with a DA-ASAT, leading the US to end testing of those weapons. The Russian test created 1600 to 1800 pieces of debris. China did a DA-ASAT test in 2007, although the source articles don't have a number for the amount of pieces it created.
Twelve countries followed the U.S., including five E.U. members: Austria, France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. A U.N. General Assembly resolution encouraging countries to adopt similar bans won backing from 155 nations last December.
Overall, it's hard to think countries voluntarily restricting their testing is a Bad Thing. The effects of the debris from an ASAT weapon, though, don't seem to be limited to Direct Ascent. If some form of ASAT weapon is placed on orbit, and satellites are turned into debris fields, the cascade of debris hitting other things in space forming even more debris is going to happen. It doesn't have to come from a DA-ASAT weapon. Wars have a tendency to expand to everything that could help win, and a thick cloud of debris started when lots of surveillance - or other - satellites were targeted could end access to space.
This is where we really need MegaMaid as depicted in Spaceballs. MegaMaid's "vacuum of space" would be just the thing to get all those fast moving pieces of debris.
Movie photo of MegaMaid from IMDB.
While stargazing with my binoculars, I've been surprised at the number of small orbiting objects that pass my view. Too dim to see with the naked eye, and too fast to track with my tripod.
ReplyDeleteRemoving space debris is a good idea...and eventually will become something that must happen to keep earth orbit safe for commercial and scientific use. The problem is how. Much of the debris is small, moving at extreme speeds and in random directions. Not an easy problem to solve. A high speed piece of debris could easily destroy whatever is sent up to collect it making the debris problem even worse. Whoever comes up with a viable solution will be able to name their price...assuming a solution is possible.
ReplyDeleteIn general things in the same orbit have low speeds with respect to each other. They're essentially flying in formation. It's those rare instances when things cross that those huge, very destructive relative velocity differences show up. The big problem with a collision or ASAT weapon is that it puts debris in unpredictable trajectories and raises the chance of a Really Bad Outcome.
DeleteThe U.S. has tested a DA-ASAT system as well.
ReplyDeleteD'oh! I thought I included that. Yeah, we decided to say no one should ever do that after we proved to ourselves we could do it. I'd say "lost in the editing" but more like "lost during short term memory."
DeleteAre you alluding to the Boeing/LTV ASAT? They got that one shot off in 1985 and were restricted to just shooting at stars after that.
DeleteMe? I don't remember the date, and my usual way of remembering dates by remembering what I was working on when it happened isn't firing on all cylinders. I think it was in the early '00s, just because I'm fairly sure it wasn't as far back as '85. Something makes me think more of the period between '03 and '08.
DeletePretty sure it was this operation to bring down the non-functioning USA-193 satellite.
DeleteThat could be. I tend to remember where I was when I hear about things and this matches with the building more. The one BillB mentioned, in 1985 was in a completely different time of my life (much like how 2008 is different from 1985).
Delete