China radar at South Pole...

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Yes you might be that dumb, line of site is 360 degrees as far up as the equator from the South Pole can’t do this anywhere else except the north pole.

597848[/snapback]

 

Get a piece of paper and a pencil - or for you, I suppose, crayon. Draw a circle about six inches across. Make a dot about a quarter-inch outside the circle. Draw two lines from the dot so that they just touch the circle without going inside it. Draw another line from the point where one line touches the circle to the point where the other line touches the circle (note: this line should go through the circle. If it doesn't, draw a straight line). Inside that triangle formed by the three lines, you will see a piece of the circle. Note that that piece of the circle is substantially less that 360 degrees.

 

Then take your drawing and run to mother shouting "Look mommy, I drawed an ice cream cone!"

[ASCI]

I don’t know the altitude of military satellite obits nor does anyone here so you may be right about a view to the equator we just don’t know for sure. The earth is not a perfect spear either; it’s a little bit flattened.

 

Once again assuming that most or all military satellites are in a polar obit then a south pole station will allow direct over head viewing of all polar orbiting satellites 360 degrees tangent to the station. So CTM or DC Tom, who ever I’m talking to today, you cannot do this from any other point on the earth except for the North Pole. This along with the no man made interference or noise makes a polar spy/sabotage station a national security problem.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

I don’t know the altitude of military satellite obits nor does anyone here so you may be right about a view to the equator we just don’t know for sure.

 

Uh...yeah, I do. They're low earth orbits, because 1) it permits better resolution in imaging, 2) permits better global coverage, as the sattelite orbits quickly as the earth turns under it, and 3) the weight of the sattelites, power of the boosters that orbit them, and power required to launch anything into a polar orbit prohibit getting them higher than about 1000km. Most of the orbits have a 1000km apogee and 300km perigee.

 

  The earth is not a perfect spear either; it’s a little bit flattened. 

 

By about a fiftieth of a percent. Round for all practical purposes...save the purpose of someone trying to bull sh-- their way out of a set of statements that demonstrate their complete ignorance.

 

Once again assuming that most or all military satellites are in a polar obit then a south pole station will allow direct over head viewing of all polar orbiting satellites 360 degrees tangent to the station.

598157[/snapback]

 

As does any point on the planet. The reason you put sattelites into polar orbit is because, as the sattelite orbits north-south while the earth rotates west to east, every point on the surface of the earth passes within the line of sight of the sattelite...usually within 24-48 hours, since polar orbits are roughly 90-minute orbits.

 

  So CTM or DC Tom, who ever I’m talking to today, you cannot do this from any other point on the earth except for the North Pole.

 

Maybe YOU can't...but that's because you know precisely nothing about orbital mechanics or physics or even geometry for that matter. The rest of us would have no problem watching polar sattelites from our back yards.

 

This along with the no man made interference or noise makes a polar spy/sabotage station a national security problem.

 

So even though you don't know the first thing about orbital mechanics...the pole's still ideal because it's "quiet". That must be why most every industrialized country on the planet has established spy stations on the South Pole...because they don't realize that when you point an antenna/mirror up, you're pointing it away from terrestrial interference.

 

But it's really funny, watching you try to pretend you know what you're talking about.

[ASCI]

Uh...yeah, I do.  They're low earth orbits, because 1) it permits better resolution in imaging, 2) permits better global coverage, as the sattelite orbits quickly as the earth turns under it, and 3) the weight of the sattelites, power of the boosters that orbit them, and power required to launch anything into a polar orbit prohibit getting them higher than about 1000km.  Most of the orbits have a 1000km apogee and 300km perigee.

By about a fiftieth of a percent.  Round for all practical purposes...save the purpose of someone trying to bull sh-- their way out of a set of statements that demonstrate their complete ignorance.

As does any point on the planet.  The reason you put sattelites into polar orbit is because, as the sattelite orbits north-south while the earth rotates west to east, every point on the surface of the earth passes within the line of sight of the sattelite...usually within 24-48 hours, since polar orbits are roughly 90-minute orbits. 

Maybe YOU can't...but that's because you know precisely nothing about orbital mechanics or physics or even geometry for that matter.  The rest of us would have no problem watching polar sattelites from our back yards.

So even though you don't know the first thing about orbital mechanics...the pole's still ideal because it's "quiet".  That must be why most every industrialized country on the planet has established spy stations on the South Pole...because they don't realize that when you point an antenna/mirror up, you're pointing it away from terrestrial interference.

 

But it's really funny, watching you try to pretend you know what you're talking about. 

598176[/snapback]

If China wants to start taking out polar satellites from china and assuming they need a direct over head shot at them with a laser to be effective (closest point to them) then by your info it would take them 48 hours to complete the task, plenty of time for the US to retaliate to stop it. If china has a polar base it takes them according to your info 90 minutes to take out all the polar orbiting satellites. Not much time to stop them. Advantage China.

[ASCI]

Uh...yeah, I do. They're low earth orbits, because 1) it permits better resolution in imaging, 2) permits better global coverage, as the sattelite orbits quickly as the earth turns under it, and 3) the weight of the sattelites, power of the boosters that orbit them, and power required to launch anything into a polar orbit prohibit getting them higher than about 1000km. Most of the orbits have a 1000km apogee and 300km perigee.

 

Polar orbits can occur at any altitude, but most satellites in polar orbits use LEOs, early-warning satellites which would report a launch of nuclear weapons are as high as 60,000 miles.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Polar orbits can occur at any altitude, but most satellites in polar orbits use LEOs,  early-warning satellites which would report a launch of nuclear weapons are as high as 60,000 miles.

598220[/snapback]

 

Early warning satellites are not in polar orbits, they're in geosynchronous orbits (which are NOT polar, by definition), for the simple reason that you need them to look down at one spot all the time. You CAN put a satellite in polar orbit at any altitude...but there's usually no particular reason to.

 

Seriously, are you just pulling this sh-- out of your ass? Making it up as you go along? Because I know not many people know much about orbital mechanics...but you're the first person I've ever known who knows nothing about orbital mechanics yet thinks he does.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

If China wants to start taking out polar satellites from china and assuming they need a direct over head shot at them with a laser to be effective (closest point to them) then by your info it would take them 48 hours to complete the task, plenty of time for the US to retaliate to stop it.  If china has a polar base it takes them according to your info 90 minutes to take out all the polar orbiting satellites.  Not much time to stop them.  Advantage China.

598201[/snapback]

 

Of course, then they'd need two stations, since a polar station couldn't hit equatorial orbiting satellites...whereas one IN China could hit damn near everything China would be concerned about. Or they could launch killer satellites into orbit, like the old Soviet plan. Either way is faster, cheaper, more effective, and gives them more flexibility...and doesn't put strategic assets half a world away where they can't protect them.

 

And it keeps getting back to the question of: if it's such a good idea, why hasn't EVERYONE done it yet? Probably because it makes no sense. Scientifically and strategicly stupid.

[ASCI]

And it keeps getting back to the question of: if it's such a good idea, why hasn't EVERYONE done it yet?  Probably because it makes no sense.  Scientifically and strategicly stupid.

598251[/snapback]

the Antarctic Treaty prohibits any measures of a military nature, such as the establishment of military bases and fortifications, the carrying out of military maneuvers, or the testing of any type of weapon; it permits the use of military personnel or equipment for scientific research or for any other peaceful purposes. They would not have written this military clause into treaty if they did not see any military advantage to the South Pole. Again we really don’t know what’s going on down there, it’s not like you could drive out to it to observe.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

In related news:

 

China thinks we're ignorant about their intentions.

[Wacka]

The earth is not a perfect spear either; it’s a little bit flattened. 

 

598157[/snapback]

 

The earth is rounder and smoother than a cue ball.

[ASCI]

I don’t think you need many resources to protect a military platform at the South Pole. During the winter you can’t safely get troops on the ground or safely conduct an Arial bombing. Surface to air missiles won’t work if they take out the navigation satellites and they will have plenty of time to track and shoot them down from the platform We won’t use a nuke but could load the warhead with a conventional load, this would take time. Water vapor, ozone and dust absorb the infrared energy emitted by this type of laser. There is very little dust, water vapor or ozone at the South Pole.

[ASCI]

  Early warning satellites are not in polar orbits, they're in geosynchronous orbits (which are NOT polar, by definition), for the simple reason that you need them to look down at one spot all the time.  You CAN put a satellite in polar orbit at any altitude...but there's usually no particular reason to.

 

 

598244[/snapback]

Wrong not all, there are currently eight to twelve IR sensing satellites in polar orbit about 6,000 miles up serving as early warning satellites. You should know by now I am immune to your insults.

[Cheeseburger_in_paradise]

The earth is rounder and  smoother than a cue ball.

598300[/snapback]

 

--Christopher Columbus said that I think.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

I don’t think you need many resources to protect a military platform at the South Pole. During the winter you can’t safely get troops on the ground or safely conduct an Arial bombing.  Surface to air missiles won’t work if they take out the navigation satellites and they will have plenty of time to track and shoot them down from the platform We won’t use a nuke but could load the warhead with a conventional load, this would take time.  Water vapor, ozone and dust absorb the infrared energy emitted by this type of laser. There is very little dust, water vapor or ozone at the South Pole.

598367[/snapback]

 

There's no discussing it with you. You have no clue. None.

 

How do you think people get their meals in Antarctica? You think they have farms? No...it gets shipped in. On ships. On water. Via shipping lanes. That would need to be protected by a blue-water navy capable of operating thousands of miles from a friendly port. Which the Chinese don't have.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Wrong not all, there are currently eight to twelve IR sensing satellites in polar orbit about 6,000 miles up serving as early warning satellites.

 

Uh...no. DPS satellites are in geosynchronous orbits. If they weren't, they wouldn't be able to provide consistent coverage, which means that it would be possible for potential enemies to launch without being seen, which defeats the purpose of having the satellites up there.

 

Seriously...do you just make this stuff up?

 

You should know by now I am immune to your insults.

598392[/snapback]

 

Actually, calling you scandalously ignorant on the topic which we're discussing isn't an insult, it's a factually-based observation...if only based on the objective evidence that you don't understand the very concept of "line of sight", otherwise known as "you can't look through a planet".

[stuckincincy]

I don’t think you need many resources to protect a military platform at the South Pole. During the winter you can’t safely get troops on the ground or safely conduct an Arial bombing.  Surface to air missiles won’t work if they take out the navigation satellites and they will have plenty of time to track and shoot them down from the platform We won’t use a nuke but could load the warhead with a conventional load, this would take time.  Water vapor, ozone and dust absorb the infrared energy emitted by this type of laser. There is very little dust, water vapor or ozone at the outh Pole.

598367[/snapback]

Newbie, if somehow - doubtful - but somehow the ChiComms pulled off this technically dubious thing under a cloak of secrecy - activatition of it is a declaration of WW III. The transit time of a nuclear SBLM or continental ICBM to a patch of the South Pole is pretty short....

 

There will be no loading of some sort of high explosive warhead even contemplated.

 

The standing American CINC and the US Military are not saps. Nor are our Russian counterparts - do you think they would just "Party on, Boris!" when their border mates frolick on the ice? The Bear stilll has exceedingly bad breath and has a long history of dealings with the Celestial Empire, in the past and in its currerent iteration.

 

I leave to others the orbital mechanics, low earth orbit, etc. debate. Not in my ken.

 

It is hard to conceive that they could it on the sly. Large ships delivering goods to the Antarctic would be...noticed.

 

If the ChiComms started to construct some sort of military capability on that continent, the world governments would go ape. They would have trade doors shut in their face until they wised up.

 

If they rebuffed that, rest assured that other nations with aforehand knowledge of shenanigans, with varying level of capability would on a clandestine basis put countermeasures in place to blast their facility to Kingdom Come upon the slightest hint of it's activation.

[ASCI]

who said looking through a planet? not me, tangent maybe.

 

Polar obiter passes over the South Pole after one revolution around the earth every time, no other point on earth except the North Pole is this possible. Also a South Pole platform provides small advantage since the platform is on the earth’s axis you don’t have to correct for the spin of the earth when tracking and or targeting.

 

The U.S. Air Force’s Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) High program is scheduled to launch its first geosynchronous spacecraft in October 2006. When completed, the system will comprise a constellation of four primary satellites in geosynchronous orbit around the equator and two payloads attached to other Defense Department spacecraft in highly elliptical polar orbits. The system is scheduled to go online initially with a dedicated groundstation, two geosynchronous and one or two polar payloads between 2009 and 2010, explains Col. Mark S. Borkowski, USAF, space-based infrared systems program director at the Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California.

[ASCI]

Newbie, if somehow - doubtful - but somehow the ChiComms pulled off this technically dubious thing under a cloak of secrecy - activatition of it is a declaration of WW III.  The transit time of a nuclear SBLM or continental ICBM to a patch of the South Pole is pretty short....

 

There will be no loading of some sort of high explosive warhead even contemplated.

 

The standing American CINC and the US Military are not saps. Nor are our Russian counterparts - do you think they would just "Party on, Boris!" when their border mates frolick on the ice? The Bear stilll has exceedingly bad breath and has a long history of dealings with the Celestial Empire, in the past and in its currerent iteration.

 

I leave to others the orbital mechanics, low earth orbit, etc. debate. Not in my ken.

 

It is hard to conceive that they could it on the sly. Large ships delivering goods to the Antarctic would be...noticed.

 

If the ChiComms started to construct some sort of military capability on that continent, the world governments would go ape. They would have trade doors shut in their face until they wised up.

 

If they rebuffed that, rest assured that other nations with aforehand knowledge of shenanigans, with varying level of capability would on a clandestine basis put countermeasures in place to blast their facility to Kingdom Come upon the slightest hint of it's activation.

598635[/snapback]

I agree, if there is no question that china is erecting some type of military platform then it’s a no brainer, like you said everyone hits them hard. But, what if the Chinese convince the UN that it is a scientific research platform for “peaceful purposes” and that any attach on this station will be “viewed as an act of war”. You can’t win here; everyone will blame us for starting WWIII.

[stuckincincy]

I agree, if there is no question that china is erecting some type of military platform then it’s a no brainer, like you said everyone hits them hard.  But, what if the Chinese convince the UN that it is a scientific research platform for “peaceful purposes” and that any attach on this station will be “viewed as an act of war”.  You can’t win here; everyone will blame us for starting WWIII.

598665[/snapback]

 

I would shudder if convincing the UN is the benchmark.

 

No need to worry about blame if WW III is uncorked...who is left?

 

A quote from Albert Einstein:

 

"I know not with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will

be fought with sticks and stones."

 

 

I certainly understand your unease about any possibility of any militarization of the Antarctic continent. I share it. And good of you to combat certain posters that want to browbeat and ridicule you when you want to discuss such subjects. It's nice to learn new things, but education delivered by spearpoint is less than charming - if you get my drift.

[Scraps]

who said looking through a planet? not me, tangent maybe. 

 

598655[/snapback]

 

What did you mean by this

 

Assuming that military satellites are in a near polar orbits (which makes sense because of the direction the earth spins) the South Pole will provide southern hemisphere surveillance up to the equator at which point the earth blocks line of site as the satellite curves around the earth.