Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Sunday September 25 2016, @11:56AM   Printer-friendly
from the what-goes-up... dept.

China confirmed in a press conference, that Tiangong-1, their first space station put into orbit in 2011, will re-enter and burn up in the atmosphere sometime in late 2017. There seems to be some uncertainty in when it will re-enter the atmosphere, which leads one to believe that the station is not under orbital control and that it will come back to Earth in the same manner that Skylab did in 1979.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by martyb on Sunday September 25 2016, @12:43PM

    by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Sunday September 25 2016, @12:43PM (#406235) Journal

    Disclaimer: I'm by no means a 'rocket scientist'

    When an object falls out of orbit, it does not suddenly stop and drop straight down. An object in orbit has a huge horizontal component that provides an acceleration that matches the acceleration of gravity. Drag from the upper atmosphere gradually bleeds off speed causing it to lose altitude. As the object dips lower, the density of the atmosphere increases which, in turn, increases the drag on the object, which makes it lose even more altitude. Eventually, that altitude loss reaches the point where the object impacts the ground... and it still has a large horizontal component.

    Consider that we are starting with an object which makes a lap of the Earth every 90 minutes or so (compare that to your last long-haul flight), that is a huge amount of speed to bleed off.

    A slight variation in density at very high elevations can dramatically affect where on earth the formerly orbiting object ultimately lands. (Consider the different trajectories of throwing a baseball in: a vacuum, air at sealevel, and under water.)

    So, forecasts as to where it would land are very difficult to predict until the object has dropped quite a ways into the atmosphere and any air density variation is small compared to the average density. In other words, with reduced variability in the calculated amount of drag, a more precise estimate can be made of the final landing location. Even then, instead of an impact point it is more likely to be an expected path or stripe on the Earth.

    It is early in the morning as I post this, so any corrections/clarifications by those more knowledgeable in orbital mechanics are welcome!

    --
    Wit is intellect, dancing.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Informative=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 2) by Dunbal on Sunday September 25 2016, @02:46PM

    by Dunbal (3515) on Sunday September 25 2016, @02:46PM (#406268)

    GO KERBALS!

    Nothing wrong with what you said. The object will heat up and start tumbling. The combination of heat and g-forces from the tumbling it will be doing will cause all but the largest and most solid components to break up into small pieces. There might be a few chunks left that could be hazardous if they fell on anyone but good old probability dictates that those will end up falling in the ocean or on empty land. While there are more people and cities than there were in the 1970's when Skylab came down it's still not THAT crowded yet. This is pretty much a non issue but the uncertainty and fear sells news articles and generates hits.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by deadstick on Sunday September 25 2016, @03:16PM

    by deadstick (5110) on Sunday September 25 2016, @03:16PM (#406277)

    To amplify a bit: The trajectory of a deorbiting object can be predicted accurately if we know the shape and mass of the object, because that's enough information to calculate the drag. It works well for an object that's designed to reenter, like a missile or a manned spacecraft. But these objects are also designed to survive the process.

    A space station isn't: it's designed to stay up there and it won't reenter in one piece. It will break up in a highly unpredictable manner, with each piece having a different shape and mass and coming down in a different place. Further, even the point at which the disintegration starts is unpredictable, so there's a huge uncertainty in how far along the orbital track pieces will start impacting. Once the disintegration starts, more information starts to emerge, and the center of the impact area can be predicted to some degree of precision -- but this won't happen until well into the last revolution. Basically, you can draw a stripe on the map many hundreds of km long and say most of the debris will come down in it.

    Something to worry about? No: nature throws rocks at you every day, and almost always misses. Meteors big enough to get through the atmosphere hit the surface at a rate of dozens per day, worldwide. Estimate the fraction of the Earth's surface that's occupied by human flesh and you're on the way to seeing why human injuries are pretty rare (one in the 20th century, more in the massive Chelyabinsk event of 2013).

    I would gladly stand outdoors at the computed impact center...it would be quite a show.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 25 2016, @04:20PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 25 2016, @04:20PM (#406297)

    Duh