6 ms·
Object that fell from the skies identified as separation ring from a rocket
- metadat 2y agoIf planes, with active propellers or jet engines, are only audible for a diameter of 20-50km around the vehicle, how could a falling unpowered ring of metal be audible from 200km away as per TFA?
- jcims 2y agoIt would have been supersonic at a very high altitude and likely came in at a steep angle, so sonic boom + large exposure area + long path.
- MR4D 2y agoSonic boom(s). Unsure what the speed is, but could have been significantly higher than terminal velocity at sea level.
- zardo 2y agoWhile it was supersonic it would have produced a sonic boom all along it's path of travel.
- aaron695 2y ago[dead]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- sebmellen 2y agoDo we have any idea which rocket this came from?
- philipwhiuk 2y agoI asked Johnathan McDowell, who tracks space objects alongside his main job working on Chandra. He's much less convinced it's from a rocket. https://bsky.app/profile/planet4589.bsky.social/post/3leq2wbcjrc2q https://bsky.app/profile/planet4589.bsky.social/post/3leq2wb... There's not any great candidates.
- jamieplex 2y agoI agree with Jonathan. It seems to be a very low-tech, solid steel ring gear assembled and riveted together from 4 distinct parts. Not very aero-spacey at all...
- cjbgkagh 2y agoWhat other industries use rivets? Wouldn’t most non-aerospace use welds?
- mapt 2y agoThe size and shape alone says either rocketry or a piece of a jet turbine. And lacking any obvious plane crashes nearby... M-V (Japan) Epsilon (Japan) Athena (US) Rokot (USSR) Soyuz-U (USSR) Soyuz-FG (Russia) Simorgh (Iran) ... many more There are a comical number of options with parts that have a diameter somewhere in the 2.3-2.7m range.
- LorenDB 2y agoIt's "Jonathan", not "Johnathan". I see this misspelling often and it bothers me every time.
- jamieplex 2y agosorry, I copied the other guy...
- ivewonyoung 2y agoCould be from something like this: https://old.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/1bmpxaq/thais_native_fireworks/ https://old.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/1bmpxaq/t...
- jamieplex 2y agoApproximately 8' diameter (other commenters pointed out a more reasonable size) solid steel ring gear (riveted together from 4 parts). Doesn't look anything like a "separation ring", and certainly isn't large enough. Plus it is solid steel. I am kinda doubting the whole story at this point. No way it is from a rocket (too heavy, too low-tech, no ring gears in rocketry), and doubtful from any commercial aircraft (again, too low-tech and too heavy).
- philipwhiuk 2y agoI thought it might be an jet-engine cowl, but I don't know enough about planes.
- jamieplex 2y agoCowlings are generally thin aluminum or composite materials, never steel. Cowlings are considered "fairings", generally to smooth the air-stream in and around the engine.
- buildsjets 2y agoDo you have a theory on where the rest of the airplane went?
- philipwhiuk 2y agoMy assumption was that it landed sans-cowl. But it turns out it might be from an Ariane upper stage after all.
- buildbot 2y agoThe rust does stand out as kind odd, not many aerospace materials rust??? How fast would you have to spin a gear ring to say, launch it on a ballistic trajectory and have it go supersonic? Maybe a factory somewhere had a _really_ catastrophic accident?
- jamieplex 2y ago
- davidw 2y ago"The Gods Must Be Crazy - 2025"
- taneq 2y agoMy first thought was “Wow, that’s a lot bigger than a coke bottle.”
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- doubleg72 2y agoNo one here considering the fact it isn't burnt up, at all?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- schiffern 2y ago"compensating locals shocked by the fallen object." Good luck with that. Anyone know what's the going rate for a startle? :-/ Actual damage would be one thing, but this is simply an absurd attempted cash grab.
- ghssds 2y agoThere are laws against littering.
- schiffern 2y agoCertainly, but that's a very different legal theory from 'compensation for shock.' Incidentally, littering fines for space debris don't have the greatest track record of enforceability.[1] [1] https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/70708/nasas-unpaid-400-littering-ticket-skylab-debris-australia https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/70708/nasas-unpaid-400-l...
- engineer_22 2y agoPoor people behave the same way all over the world.
- yalogin 2y agoI remember seeing this on Reddit a few days ago and immediately folks identified it as a part from a rocket. Here is the link https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1hq6o9w/a_large_circular_object_fell_from_the_sky_in_a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1hq6o9w/a_large_circu...
- jcims 2y agoI'm nearly certain it's irrelevant but it does make me wonder where parts of the rockets used to launch the ballistic missiles that were recently put into hostile action would have landed.
- goku12 2y agoSomewhere in between the launcher and the target. Ballistic missiles fly a near-parabolic sub-orbital trajectory. That also means that everything on the missile reenters and crashes (or reaches the target) within minutes of the launch. This is a matter or energy management. If your payload (the warhead) is going to land somewhere on Earth, why waste energy in flinging it on a high-velocity (possibly orbital) trajectory when that energy could be used to loft more of the payload (a heavier warhead) directly at the target? There are a few cases where this concept of lowest-energy trajectory is not followed. One of them is a lofted-trajectory launch. The missile flies a higher ballistic trajectory than what's necessary to reach the target. This is sometimes used for missile tests or for target ranges less than the missile's maximum range. However, this is also a sub-orbital trajectory and behaves more or less the same as before. Another case is the Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS) where the warhead enters a low orbit and then deorbits towards the target. Space debris situations like in this story (where the rocket body lands well away from the target, long after the launch) can possibly occur in FOBS launches. However, this isn't very energy efficient. It's main advantage is that it's harder to detect and intercept, since its orbital trajectory is much lower than a pure ballistic trajectory. Even then, some countries can knock them out in orbit using ASAT (anti-sat) detectors and interceptors. It's not that commonly used, except in combination with other technologies like hypersonic gliding and waveriding.
- jcims 2y agoThis is all very cool information, thank you!
- monkeyfun 2y agoIt's fairly niche here, but I would like to note that lofting can be more efficient than either a purely direct or ballistic trajectory -- one only needs consider the case of going higher in the atmosphere so as to have less air drag at extremely high velocities. Can mean a higher speed, acceleration, and a longer range for the same payload. In a sense, this is actually done with high velocity rocketry in general. Often most launch profiles involve a steep ascent before smoothing it out into a softer turn.
- firesteelrain 2y agoHow come no one has pointed out that this could be a conspiracy for a cash grab?
- SteveVeilStream 2y agoThe charts showing the growth of the number of objects in orbit in recent years are wild. I have to expect this will be a lot more common going forward.
- LinuxBender 2y agoHow many people will have to be fatally injured before international laws put seriously painful financial fines on companies dropping crap from space? Or will my fantasy come true that all roads, infrastructure, homes and businesses move underground?
- rectang 2y ago> Or will my fantasy come true that all roads, infrastructure, homes and businesses move underground? Accursed Gamelans. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tytrgmVIwlg&t=114s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tytrgmVIwlg&t=114s