Āé¶¹“«Ć½

Anti-satellite weapon used simple technology

China's recent test highlights a disturbing fact: essentially any country that can put a satellite into orbit could launch a weapon to destroy one

Relatively simple technology suffices to take out a satellite the way the Chinese government apparently did last week, space weapons analysts say. Essentially any country that can put a satellite in orbit could launch a weapon to destroy one.

The US government says China launched a ballistic missile on 11 January that destroyed one of its own spacecraft, a defunct weather satellite called Fengyun-1C, in an apparent test of anti-satellite technology (see China dismisses ā€˜space arms race’ fears).

This makes China one of just three nations in history to have successfully tested an anti-satellite weapon, along with the US and the former Soviet Union. But the technology required is not very sophisticated, potentially putting it in reach of other countries as well.

ā€œIt’s pretty low tech – it’s essentially like throwing a rock at someone,ā€ says space security analyst Laura Grego of the Union of Concerned Scientists in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US.

This method is called a ā€˜kinetic energy weapon’ because the energy released by the high-speed collision itself destroys the satellite, rather than any explosives.

The launch vehicle was probably just an ordinary medium-range ballistic missile, she says. Getting the weapon to hit the 1.5-metre-wide satellite, however, would be more of a challenge than simply getting it into space.

Homing device

Information about satellite positions from ground-based tracking alone is not precise enough to allow a missile to hit a satellite, so the missile would have needed a built-in homing device to zero in on the satellite, Grego says.

This could be done with a video camera that records the satellite’s position, while thrusters adjust the missile’s course to guide it into a collision, she says.

Taking out a satellite this way is not very difficult. ā€œIf you can put a satellite into orbit, you can hit a satellite,ā€ she says.

With an impact speed of several kilometres per second, an impactor of 10 kilograms or even less would be enough to destroy a satellite, she says.

ā€œIt’s one of the simplest ways and one of the most effective,ā€ she told Āé¶¹“«Ć½. ā€œThe problem is that it has some of the worst consequences because of the debris issue.ā€

ā€˜Raised hackles’

The destruction of the satellite is thought to have produced millions of fragments, including 40,000 more than 1 centimetre across and 800 more than 10 centimetres across. Centimetre-scale fragments are large enough to destroy satellites (see Anti-satellite test generates dangerous space debris).

The US and the former Soviet Union have also tested anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons. In 1997, the US tested an infrared laser on the ground that would have been powerful enough to fry a satellite in orbit, but the laser apparently failed to work. It did successfully destroy a satellite in a 1985 test using a kinetic energy weapon launched from an aeroplane.

And the former Soviet Union did tests where a satellite crept up on another one in orbit, then spewed out pellets at the other satellite to destroy it.

Although the recent Chinese test ā€œraised everybody’s hacklesā€, the US has not wanted to discuss treaties to ban such weaponry – and indeed it still appears to be developing ASAT technologies itself, Grego says.

ā€œI would suggest that we come to the table and hammer out rules of the road for space and rules of proper behaviour,ā€ she says.

Weapons Technology – Keep up with the latest innovations in our cutting edge .