4 ms·
"Legit conspiracy theory time. How do you put a satellite in orbit without anyone knowing about it? You hide it with another satellite! Apparently, during the
by valuearb 9y ago
"Legit conspiracy theory time. How do you put a satellite in orbit without anyone knowing about it? You hide it with another satellite!
Apparently, during the first launch window for Zuma back on November 15, a secretive US satellite tracked as "USA-276" was due to fly directly overhead under conditions ideal for a rendezvous. USA-276 itself is secretive and unusual, having passed as close as four miles from the ISS. It seems like the NRO (or whoever actually built it) has a lot of confidence in their control over that satellite and its maneuverability.
The rescheduled launch window for Zuma seemed to rule out a rendezvous with USA-276; the launch inclination was expected to be similar, but the satellite wouldn't be passing overhead at the time. However, several days of launch delays coincidentally moved Zuma's launch window closer and closer to lining up with USA-276's orbit. The earlier launch windows could have been decoys, intended to suggest a willingness to launch away from USA-276 when it remained their goal the whole time.
What are the reasons for this? Well, if USA-276 is meant to be a highly maneuverable satellite, it could potentially burn through fuel quickly. Testing the ability to refuel an unmanned spy satellite would be highly valuable. If you made the rendezvous quickly, you could claim your refueling drone was "lost" and it would be hard to disprove. We're not yet at the point that civilians can track the exact location of every satellite at all times without government help (hell, we can still lose highly advanced jumbo jets in the middle of the ocean). Once the refueling drone is docked with USA-276, they would be tracked as a single object in orbit.
Why claim it's lost, then? To try to hide that you have this ability. That's especially relevant when you consider the repeated close passes USA-276 has made to the ISS. It seems like a satellite meant to surveil other satellites, which would be more valuable if it had ample fuel and could make orbital changes more frequently. You'd only get one real shot at it before the element of surprise is lost, but if you had a maneuverable satellite with ample fuel on board, you could go take close-up photos of a few Russian satellites before they realized what you were doing. Hell, maybe even get close enough to grab one and deorbit it."
https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/01/the-zuma-satellite-launched-by-spacex-may-be-lost-sources-tell-ars/?comments=1&start=80 https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/01/the-zuma-satellite-l...
- walkingolof 9y agoInteresting there about refueling, apparently it completed at least one orbit according to Spacetracks...
- nyolfen 9y agomore on USA-276: https://mainenginecutoff.com/blog/2017/07/continuing-mystery-saga-usa-276 https://mainenginecutoff.com/blog/2017/07/continuing-mystery...
- gozur88 9y ago>How do you put a satellite in orbit without anyone knowing about it? You hide it with another satellite! Heh. There was a Russian launch recently where a piece of "debris" started moving under its own power after stage separation. http://www.iflscience.com/space/mysterious-satellite-sparks-concerns-russia-has-developed-space-weapon/ http://www.iflscience.com/space/mysterious-satellite-sparks-...
- lsaferite 9y agoThat article has no date attached. I find that infuriating.
- grzm 9y agoNot unusual for aggregation sites like that, unfortunately. The FT article it in turn does cite has a dateline of November 17, 2014. https://www.ft.com/content/cdd0bdb6-6c27-11e4-990f-00144feabdc0# https://www.ft.com/content/cdd0bdb6-6c27-11e4-990f-00144feab... The year is also reflected in the naming of the object, by the way: Object 2014-28E.
- arprocter 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_2499 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_2499
- tzfld 9y ago>Hell, maybe even get close enough to grab one and deorbit it. No way they could do this without being observed. And that would be considered an act of war.
- aeleos 9y agoHonestly given all the weird stuff that happened with this satellite this doesn’t seem too far fetched. The fact that it got way too close to the iss, and that zuma aligned with its orbit not just once but both scheduled launch attempts seems way too fishy for me. Given all this incredibly unusual activity, especially given how big and separated everything in space usually is, this is honestly the most reasonable theory I have seen so far. The more I think about it the more it makes sense.