Saturday, May 8, 2021

[UPDATE: Dropped Into the Indian Ocean Near the Maldives.] Just Like July of 1979 -- We Are All In A "Space Junk / Hail Stone" Shooting Gallery, For The Next Day Or Two...


While any individual person's risk of being hit is nearly infinitesimal -- it is likely that this 22 ton piece of junk, likely in a super-sonic "hail shower" of broken up pieces. . . will fall somewhere onto Earth, in the next 48 hours.

To be clear, this rocket debris is less than a fortieth (H/T Salmon!) the mass that rained down over western Australia (Skylab: over 800 tons), in July 1979, when NASA allowed Skylab to fall back to Earth. Back then, precociously, the small-town in western Australia called Esperance sent NASA a $400 municipal ticket -- for "littering". But most of the larger pieces of Skylab ended up deep at the bottom of the Indian Ocean, in truth.

So, we will avoid demonizing the Chinese space program (as we too have committed this same sin, in much greater magnitude, as well) -- but clearly, that agency should henceforth make more robust plans, for controlling de-orbit of its larger rocket stages. Here's CNN on it, about an hour ago:

. . .The Long March 5B rocket, which is around 100 feet tall and weighs 22 tons, is expected to enter Earth's atmosphere "around May 8," according to a statement from Defense Department spokesperson Mike Howard, who said the US Space Command is tracking the rocket's trajectory. . . .


Perhaps the name chosen for the Chinese Mars rover will prove prophetic, here at home -- on Earth this weekend, but it is highly likely the whole hail storm of junk falls harmlessly into the deep blue Atlantic or Pacific oceans. We shall see. Onward, smiling just the same. . . .

That summer of '79 -- over a mile under the Earth, in the mines was. . . crazy, too.



नमस्ते

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Pet peeve here.

Something cannot be 40 times smaller.

When you're multiplying by any number greater than 1 the product has to increase. It cannot become smaller.

The correct way is to say it's less than 1/40 the mass.

condor said...

Fair enough, old friend. . . .

Fixed it, and credited you -- to my eye (at lest) it is not hard to understand the meaning conveyed, in either form, even if one is the more pedestrian formulation.

Thanks!