International Space Station Crew Has Close Call With Space Junk

SETH BORENSTEIN   03/12/09 08:32 PM ET   AP

Space Station

WASHINGTON — The near-hit of space junk Thursday was a warning shot fired across the bow of the international space station, experts said. There's likely more to come in the future. With less than an hour's notice, the three astronauts were told they'd have to seek shelter in a Russian capsule parked at the space station in case a speeding piece of space junk hit Thursday.

If it hit and they were in the main part of the station, they'd have only 10 minutes of safety, Mission Control told them. A hole in the space station could mean loss of air, loss of pressure and eventual loss of life.

The crew moved so fast that they may have left their instruction manual on the other side of a closed hatch. Inside the Soyuz, they waited for 10 minutes, ready to flee to Earth if the worst happened. On the ground, space debris experts fretted.

"We were watching it with bated breath," NASA space debris scientist Mark Matney said. "We didn't know what was going to happen."

The debris missed. Engineers still don't even know by how much and may never get a good figure. It could have been a few hundred feet or a couple miles.

In space, Commander Mike Fincke said they watched out the Soyuz window.

"We didn't see anything of course. We were wondering how close we were," he radioed Houston.

Matney, who has been with NASA since 1992 called it the closest call he can ever remember.

But it happened a month after two satellites collided in orbit, adding several hundred pieces into the space litter belt. And in the last few years, the problem of debris in space has gotten much worse with satellites destroyed on purpose.

"It's yet another warning shot that we really have to do something about space debris now. We have to do something on an international level," said Harvard astrophysicist Jonathan McDowell, who tracks everything in orbit.

"As we continue to put stuff up there, the predictions are that the rate (of close calls) will increase," added William Ailor, director of the Center for Orbital and Reentry Debris Studies at the Aerospace Corp. in El Segundo, Calif.

The U.S. Space Command tracks 13,943 orbiting objects 4 inches or larger. Only about 900 of those are working satellites, McDowell said. The rest is litter. There are thousands more smaller pieces of junk that can't be tracked as easily.

In space, size doesn't matter too much after about 3 or 4 inches. Speed does. The object that put the scare into the space station was probably 5 inches, Matney said. McDowell figures it was even bigger, maybe a foot: "a long thin thing" with a thread or string attached.

It was traveling 5.5 miles per second _ about 20,000 mph, according to NASA spokesman Josh Byerly.

At that speed, something 5 inches "will wreck your whole day," Matney said.

Usually with enough warning, NASA will just move the space station out of harm's way. But NASA didn't learn of the threat until Wednesday night. This piece was in an odd orbit that kept dipping into Earth's atmosphere, making it hard to track, Matney said.

NASA didn't notify the astronauts until a couple hours after they woke on Thursday because they wanted to try to get more information about the debris, said NASA spokesman Kyle Herring

The object likely was a "yo weight" used to stabilize a global positioning satellite placed in orbit in 1993, McDowell and Matney said. It is ejected when the satellite is in its proper position.

NASA spokesman Byerly said station crews have used Soyuz as a precaution five times because of debris. But NASA space junk expert Matney said he couldn't it recall ever being used because of space debris.

The space station and space shuttle have been hit by debris in the past. But so far the only holes have been in the station's solar panels and in the shuttle radiator, neither of them dangerous, McDowell said.

"It just needs to hit at exactly the wrong place and then you have a problem," McDowell said.

The trash is even worse in the orbit of the Hubble Space Telescope. The February satellite crash increased the risk of junk hitting the space shuttle when it repairs Hubble. NASA is still calculating whether it's safe enough to do the repairs later this year.

Smaller space debris often falls into lower orbit and eventually burns up as it returns to Earth. But David Wright, a physicist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said, "some of the big things will be up there for centuries and those are the ones that can really wreak havoc."

Lately, countries and companies launching satellites design their rockets and satellites to limit debris. But that needs to be made mandatory, McDowell said. And the latest problems may spur that type of action, Ailor said.

Russia's state-run Vesti-24 television reported on a lighter moment in the space station evacuation. Apparently the crew members left an instruction manual on board and Fincke had to be told by Mission Control how to go about getting back onto the station once the threat had passed.

___

Associated Press Writer Steve Gutterman contributed to this report from Moscow.

___

On the Net:

NASA's International Space Station: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/main/index.html

FOLLOW HUFFPOST

WASHINGTON — The near-hit of space junk Thursday was a warning shot fired across the bow of the international space station, experts said. There's likely more to come in the future. With less th...
WASHINGTON — The near-hit of space junk Thursday was a warning shot fired across the bow of the international space station, experts said. There's likely more to come in the future. With less th...
Filed by Nicholas Sabloff  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 32
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
08:22 PM on 03/12/2009
In the year 2050 a free energy non-polluting hyperdrive engine was invented...the problem is the our near space is so full of trash that nothing bigger than a Volkswagen can pass through it.
08:19 PM on 03/12/2009
they need a big"Do Not Litter" sign up in Space .
07:53 PM on 03/12/2009
I am old enough to remember the awe and amazement of watching Sputnik crossing the evening sky. How sad that humans cannot seem to go anywhere, even space, without trashing their environment.
photo
SILVANUS
Moving to Italy indefinitely. God Bless All.
06:37 PM on 03/12/2009
HILARIOUS.

Humans attacked by their own trash in space!!
06:22 PM on 03/12/2009
lol, why does this make me laugh?

Definition of the space station.

"A hole in the sky you throw money into".
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Bluesue
05:31 PM on 03/12/2009
If I ever knew the purpose of the space station, I've long forgotten it. The thing is getting old and there have been some close calls. It's time to shut it down.
05:59 PM on 03/12/2009
I could not disagree more. There are plenty of things it can be used for and we should expand on it, not shut it down...
08:23 PM on 03/12/2009
Concept:

ServiceMaster/OuterSpace Division. "We clean up all your space debris!"
06:30 PM on 03/12/2009
I whole-heartedly agree and like you, I too cannot recall its purpose nor any worthwhile advantages towards mankind, etc. the it has produced? With your country in such a turmoil, you would think that this would be one of the first departments to be shutdown and the money used to help rebuild the nation, but, nope!

And we have no way of knowing what "that" piece of space junk was for sure? They say it was this or that, but how can they prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt? Show me?. There HAS to be so much space junk loose up there, it would probably boggle the mind?
05:21 PM on 03/12/2009
NASA needs to be shut down. There's never been a major scientific breakthrough as a result of these shuttle flights - major discoveries in the solar system yes - but no major scientific breakthroughs to help mankind. Shut it down - we have better ways to spend billions.
08:24 PM on 03/12/2009
Tang!
09:57 PM on 03/12/2009
perhaps you should go to the science and nasa websites and find out what the real innovations space travel has provided are...
08:42 PM on 03/12/2009
Politely, I can only say that you don't know what you're talking about. I work in the aerospace industry, have worked with NASA and have performed work for the ISS. The number of useful everyday products that have come from ground and space based research is hard to even count.

But since you've never used anything like water filters, chordless tools, wireless phones, or worn tennis shoes with foam insoles... it's all clearly a waste of money.
05:17 PM on 03/12/2009
Assuming your math is right, is it better to risk a 1:4 chance that the astronauts get a bit bored or a stiff muscle sitting in the escape capsule, or a 1:20,000 chance of catastrophic loss? The astronauts have trained for much of their adult lives to be where they are now, with millions (billions?) spent on training and equipment, and presumably family and co-workers waiting for them on earth. The downside of their caution was a few less productive hours. So minimal harm and cost to err on the side of safety.
On the other hand, the low risk of harm has to be measured against the huge possible loss, and the huge PR nightmare of explaining to the families, the country and the world why NASA chose to ignore a known risk because they decided to play the odds.
04:25 PM on 03/12/2009
"Space Junk"

Devo
04:14 PM on 03/12/2009
also, as with airline travel, it sooo safe right up until the second it isn't. then it's a catastrophe
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
KQuarksSuperKollider
03:46 PM on 03/12/2009
Yup it was a brilliant idea for China and the US to blow up satellites to create more space debris.
04:58 PM on 03/12/2009
Except that this part is none of those. It's part of a deploy mechanism and seems to have been released on purpose during the launch/deploy phase. And if it dips into the atmosphere already, this thing will be gone shortly.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
dutchman
Two wheels good; four wheels bad.
06:49 PM on 03/12/2009
KQ is still correct, though. As the Economist quipped, it's the tragedy of the commons meets the final frontier.
03:06 PM on 03/12/2009
2.8 mile box???? That's 22 cubic miles or 90 cubic kilometers. The habitable volume of the space station is 358 cubic meters. Let's increase that by two orders of magnitude for the sensitive volume that can be damaged... so that's 40,000 cubic meters. 40,000 cubic meters out of 90 billion cubic meters is... wait for it... a chance of one in 2.25 million.

They could as well have won the lottery.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Jamie Kowalski
Composer
03:20 PM on 03/12/2009
Except you really need to calculate for the possible trajectories *through* that volume by the debris. For it to hit one, and only one spot in those 90 billion cubic meters it would have to get there by way of another dimension, leaving in the same manner.
04:14 PM on 03/12/2009
Yeah..what he said.
04:47 PM on 03/12/2009
True that. Also, I imagine the "danger zone" also depends on the inherent accuracy of the radar tracking data, plus a really healthy margin. I don't know what the error box of radar at LEO range is these days, but since it's generally phased arrays doing the tracking, through atmosphere, I suspect it's tens of meters.