• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Celebratory Gunfire Brings Down a Satellite

.
It used to be dangerous to be outside on Christmas Eve, New Years, and Easter due to the enormous number of firearms being discharged.
Now, it's really quiet.
Education and some prosecutions have cut the noise to practically zero on those nights.
BTW, it's the just pointed up a bit bullets that fly for miles and injure/kill. The vertical shots go up, stop, and fall back down much slower than they went up.
Probably not fatal if struck.

The Department of Defense actually did experiments to determine the risk posed by vertically fired bullets falling back to earth.

IIRC, what they found was that even military rifle bullets lost so much energy to drag on the round trip that when they returned to ground level they generally didn't have enough kinetic energy left to cause serious wounds.
 
The Department of Defense actually did experiments to determine the risk posed by vertically fired bullets falling back to earth.

IIRC, what they found was that even military rifle bullets lost so much energy to drag on the round trip that when they returned to ground level they generally didn't have enough kinetic energy left to cause serious wounds.

That only applies if you fire near vertically (as you said) and the bullet tumbles, which is not what happens if you joyously fire at the air. Bullets fired in the air can and do injure and kill people annually.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebratory_gunfire
 
Mythbusters left no doubt that vertically fired small arms bullets are no danger.

Most celebratory gunfire is not fired vertically, though, and it is the ballistic trajectory of non vertical rounds that can be fatal at long distances.
 
I'd think the person most at risk from firing a bullet vertically would be the person doing the shooting. Unless they're moving awfully fast as they do so, they're at the dead center of the circle of dispersion, the peak of the bell curve so to speak. That said, the mercifully few times I've seen guns fired randomly into the air, 'into the air' was somewhere around thirty to sixty degrees. I think in the mind of a drunk celebrating by firing a gun, all you have to do is miss the nearest roofline, and the bullet flies straight on till morning.
 
I'd think the person most at risk from firing a bullet vertically would be the person doing the shooting. Unless they're moving awfully fast as they do so, they're at the dead center of the circle of dispersion, the peak of the bell curve so to speak. That said, the mercifully few times I've seen guns fired randomly into the air, 'into the air' was somewhere around thirty to sixty degrees. I think in the mind of a drunk celebrating by firing a gun, all you have to do is miss the nearest roofline, and the bullet flies straight on till morning.

As has been pointed out, the bullets falling straight down are the least dangerous, which makes the shooter pretty safe. And there's nothing merciful about a thirty to sixty degree angle if someone's at the end of that low trajectory.
 
Back in the shooting days, the ramp at the local airport would have many spent bullets on it.
Not from a group on the ramp, but from the surrounding community, having flown who knows how far.
I found a 9mm bullet over at the Mall that had hit something hard.
 
But I read in this article that NASA are perfectly happy to let 550kg of satellite fall randomly to the earth.
Guardian's article is a little scant on information and detail. Here's a more in-depth article about the satellite, it's re-entry and possible risks involved: http://www.space.com/12893-dead-nasa-satellite-falling-space-junk.html

The satellite is an old decommisioned observatory Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS). It was deployed by space shuttle Discovery in 1991 (STS-48). UARS was decommisioned in 2005 and newer satellites have continued the measurements (Aura and SORCE).

As the re-entry is uncontrolled it is not known when and where exactly it will happen until hours before the event. NASA and U.S. Strategic Command will give updates here:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/uars/index.html

You can follow the satellite and even see it in the sky using these sites:
http://www.calsky.com/
http://www.heavens-above.com/

They calculate odds of hitting someone at 3200 to 1. This seems a little too probable to me.
It might be a statistical worst case number methinks - as nobody knows where exactly UARS is going to re-enter.

The event itself is not unusual. Smaller spacejunk fall to the Earth every day. Dry mass of UARS is 5668 kg. It's considered a medium-sized object and such re-entrys happen about once a year on average. Most of the space junk falls into oceans and on unpopulated or sparsely polulated areas, and there has never been reported injuries by falling space debris (but it could have happened somewhere). Lottie Williams is the only known person who has been hit by falling space junk. She was not injured: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2009/01/dayintech_0122

Here's a list of some notable re-entrys this year so far (though not as big as UARS):
reentries.png

(http://reentrynews.aero.org/past.html)

They make spectacular lightshows if you're lucky enough to see one. You can use the list of upcoming re-entries, Calsky or Heavens Above to see if there might be visible events in your area. Estimating time and place of an uncontrolled re-entry is uncertain business, and the more circular the orbit the more uncertain the estimates will be.

Actually where would the 3200 to one figure have come from anyway?
Here's a (bit older) technical paper of UARS risk assesment: Analysis of reentry survivability of UARS spacecraft
But as I don't have an access to it, I'll just describe the general principles of the method. Please keep in mind that details may differ.

AFAIK there's three modeling software suites for risk assesment: SCARAB by ESA, DAS and ORSAT by NASA. The risk assesment for the upcoming UARS re-entry was done with ORSAT. The general steps in estimating the risks are:

1. Most of the spacecraft is going to burn up in the atmosphere. Use modeling to estimate which parts of the spacecraft are going to survive the re-entry and hit the ground.
Dry mass of UARS is 5886 kg and most of it will burn.

2. Estimate which parts could cause injuries by their kinetic energy upon impact.
It's estimated that 26 surviving UARS' parts could potentially cause injuries. Their size, mass and impact energy varies. The lightest part is a 0,6 kg titanium GF extension and the most massive part is an 158 kg aluminium box structure. Parts' combined mass is 532 kg.

3. For each part estimate the area within which it could cause injuries, debris casualty area (DCA).
DCA depends on the size of the part but is usually very small for each part. The bigger the part the wider the DCA. The DCA for UARS' parts varies, stainless steel reaction wheel rims have a DCA of 0,43 m^2 and the aluminium box structure 2,44 m^2.

reentries1.jpg


4. Add the DCA of each part to get the estimated total DCA for the re-entry. For UARS the total DCA is about 22 m^2, or about the area of a living room (YMMV). Different parts will fall hundreds of kilometers from each other. UARS parts will spread about 800 km downrange but their total DCA will still be the same 22 m^2.

reentries2.jpg



5. Calculate the probability that a person is injured by debris. This could happen if an unsheltered person happens to be within the DCA.
In DAS-software the probability is a function of the year of the re-entry, world population density and distribution in that year, inclination of the orbit, and the total DCA. But I don't know how it's calculated in ORSAT.
For population densities DAS uses public databases like Gridded Population of the World. Most of the Earth's area is ocean, unpopulated or sparsely populated.

reentries3.jpg


This step is sketchy if the re-entry is uncontrolled as it's not known exactly when and where it will happen. But you can always use the inclination of the orbit as a limit for latitudes. The re-entry will happen somewhere between those latitudes though you don't know where. This is the case with UARS. As we don't know when the re-entry will happen, it's impossible to tell where it's going to happen. The exact time and place will be known only hours before the event. But at the moment it's possible to know the limiting latitudes and use that information to come up with a probability estimate (1:3200).

I don't have an access to the technical paper so the actual steps might differ. Would be great if someone with an access could provide corrections or fill in missing details. The figures are from UARS briefing material Re-Entry and Risk Assessment (498 KB PDF).
 
Last edited:
"Skylab is falling!"

There's so much nothing to hit, I'm sure it will hit nothing interesting.
 
Why not just put it on a re-entry trajectory so that it goes into the ocean....
 
Not really. But I read in this article that NASA are perfectly happy to let 550kg of satellite fall randomly to the earth.

I don't see anywhere in that article that they are happy about it. It is a 20 year old dead sattelite, so the question is, what can they do about it? If it is out of fuel, or there is no contact with it, all they can really do is track it, and as its re-entry gets nearer, possibly they can provide a better definition of the danger zone.

These days, most satellites are prepared for decommissioning; they have a fuel reserve, and there is a programme ready for either inducing a (fairly) safe re-entry, or placing them in a parking orbit (whichever is appropriate), but I don't think they gave that as much thought 20 years ago. Also, whatever the precautions, if communications break down, there is really little you can do, except wait for the fireworks.

Hans

ETA: Read spin0's excellent links, thank you. So they did initiate a re-entry, but can't control it better than that. Well, at least this one won't be adding to the junk-heap up there.
 
Last edited:
Why not just put it on a re-entry trajectory so that it goes into the ocean....

Not really a dumb question, just a layman's level, so it deserves an answer:

Well, the satellite, any satellite, has a tremendous velocity, several miles per second, just to keep it up there. It took a whopping big rocket to get it up there and going at that speed, and it would take almost as big a rocket to stop it again. Obviously, there isn't a whopping big rocket on a satellite, only some fairly tiny course correction rockets, and a few pounds of fuel, so what they do is fire those rockets to brake some of its speed, till they run out of fuel. As the satellite slows down, it gets closer to Earth, and even up there, there is some very thin traces of atmosphere left. So these thin wisps of atmosphere will slowly tuck at it, slowing it further down. When it slows down, it flies still lower, slowly encountering more air resistance, till ....

For this one, it took over five years for it to slow down to the point where it really starts grazing the upper atmosphere, but the upper atmosphere is a dynamic place, so nobody can predict exactly when and where it will go into that final dive.

Though apparently it is aimed in the general direction of the Atlantic ocean. Not bad for a 5+ year shot, really.

Hans
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom