Posted on 01/21/2018 10:22:49 PM PST by iowamark
Many people awaited last Sundays Falcon 9 launch from Cape Canaveral of a highly classified US payload. The launch had been delayed for weeks, speculation as to the satellites purpose was rampant, and successfully delivering national security satellites to orbit is an important part of SpaceXs business.
The launch, however, remains shrouded in mystery.
Shortly after the launch, Bloomberg reported that the satellite was lost, due to US Strategic Command saying they were not tracking any objects. The Wall Street Journal suggested that Congress was being briefed on a failure, and that it was due to a failure of the satellite to separate from the final stage, and so both were deorbited together.
A Verge story notes that neither SpaceX (the launcher) nor Northrop Grumman (the contractor who built the satellite) declared that the mission was a success after launch. SpaceXs president said that the Falcon 9 did everything correctly and that they did not have a failure that requires investigation. Northrop Grumman stated that it does not comment on classified missions. Northrop Grumman provided the equipment that connects the satellite to the final rocket stage and that is eventually meant to separate them. So SpaceXs claim that nothing went wrong with its end could be still be consistent with an overall failed mission.
What could the Zuma satellite be?
The Zuma satellite (USA280) is curious. Its a classified satellite and so theres no public description of its purpose. Satellite watchers usually pick up some clues about the purpose of a classified satellite by who made it and what orbit it is put in. For example, spy satellites that are imaging the ground in visible light often use sun synchronous orbits (close to a polar orbit) so that they can see the earth at a constant sun angle, which is helpful in detecting changes. Signals intelligence satellites tend to be at around 63 degrees inclination (the angle the orbit makes with respect to the equator).
Because there was no pre-launch announcement of orbital parameters, nor does the Space Track catalog provide them (it never does for such classified missions), we dont know what orbit it was meant to go in exactly, but you can tell the approximate inclination by where the hazard zones are from its launch.
Marco Langbroek created this image of the Zuma launch hazard zone (in red in Fig. 1) for his blog:
This indicates that the satellite was launched in an orbit that was inclined around 50 degrees to the equator, similar to the International Space Station. Not many satellites use low earth orbits with 50 degree inclinations, except for satellites that were launched from the space station and so end up there. (See for yourself by sorting the satellites in the UCS Satellite Database.)
One other recent classified satellite, USA 276, was launched in that type of orbit, and it was launched in a similar direction as Zuma. That satellite was launched not only in the same orbital inclination as the ISS but also the same orbital plane. It was subsequently observed by the amateur observing community as having made a close approach to the ISS when it was performing docking maneuvers. Marco has a fascinating analysis in The Space Review about it.
What happened to it?
Zuma (USA 280) is still listed as a payload on orbit by the US space surveillance system (Fig. 2), as of this writing (January 12). So something made it into orbit and went around at least once. The object is listed as a payload and not as launch debris, indicating it is the satellite.
Marcos blog also reports sighting of the re-entry of an object that seems to square with the predicted time for the (intentional) de-orbit of the Falcon 9s final stage, so that appears to no longer be in space. This is consistent with the successful placing into orbit of the satellite and the disposal of the last stage. (Thats good space hygiene.)
So there are a few possibilities:
Whether the satellite is functioning as intended would be difficult to tell, at least at first. If satellite watchers manage to see it and determine its orbital parameters over a period of time, they may be able to see whether it performs any maneuvers. An on-orbit maneuver is a positive sign that the satellite is at least alive, although doesnt say whether its performing as designed. The lack of such maneuvers, especially if the satellite is in a relatively low orbit and would ordinarily need to compensate for atmospheric drag, can indicate that it is not functioning. Radars should be able to track the satellite, so presumably countries with space surveillance-capable radars, such as China and Russia, know quite a bit more about this already.
There are things that you can do to make it harder to see a satellite. You can minimize its radar reflectivity so that Russian and Chinese radars would have a harder time seeing it. You can minimize how reflective it is in the sunlight so that ground-based optical observers would have a hard time seeing it, too. Or you might make the satellites orbit unpredictable by maneuvering, so trackers must perform a time-consuming search for it each time they want to see it.
Youd probably need to do all these things at the same time to have hope of being stealthy for a significant period of time, and these techniques put a lot of constraints on the satellite itself. And one cannot credibly hope to stay stealthy indefinitely.
Whats curious about Zuma is that the bits of information dont yet add up to a coherent story. Theres more information to come which may helpstay tuned!
Ah, the UCS. Helping America’s enemies since it was founded through stupidity, blindness and/or design.
Not quite as bad as the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), long run by Jeremy Stone, the son of identified Communist Party USA member and paid KGB agent I.F. “Izzy” Stone.
Look them up at www.DiscoverTheNetwork.org and www.keywiki.org for some interesting information.
The Union of Communist Scientists.
I thought the reported failure of this satellite was a cover story.
Maybe it exploded over Michigan. Easy enough to plant a few rocky pieces on Bass lake to fool amateurs for a while. (Was right over my head, or so it seemed)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.