43 ms·

I don't think you could crash the ISS into New York. I don't even think that's possible. It doesn't have the engines necessary to get back to the surface.

speeder 13y ago
Getting down is way easier than getting up. ISS has some engines, crashing on earth is very simple, you can just thrust in the opposite direction that you are going (thus falling into the planet, although slowly and probably astronauts can find the attacker and put it back into orbit before anything serious happens) or you can trust in a diagonal of sorts, to slow your speed AND toward the planet (if you just accelerate toward the planet is more probably that you will only create a elongated orbit, and if you insist, you will slingshot out of orbit).
- redblacktree 13y ago
  It seems like the harder part would be hitting New York. You could crash the ISS somewhere on Earth pretty trivially, if you had the controls.
  - icambron 13y ago
    Assuming they didn't, you know, disconnect you while you were doing it. There are actual people up there; presumably they have manual overrides.
    - redblacktree 13y ago
      Right. I was assuming/implying a lot by saying, "if you had the controls." In the hypothetical where you have complete control of the ISS (despite manual overrides, et al), you'd still have a very hard time hitting a specific target on Earth. You could crash the thing fairly easily though. That's all I meant to say; I understand that this isn't a practical reality.
      - icambron 13y ago
        Yup, I understood. I was just adding a thought about how it was even more impractical than your comment suggested. Wasn't arguing against your point itself.
- DoubleCluster 13y ago
  I'm not sure the ISS has enough delta-v to get back down quickly. Lowering the orbit enough so that it will fall down in a few weeks is probably possible.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    It's likely that a decent orbital dynamics model and a relatively small, well-timed delta-v would bring the ISS down within a rater small planned impact area. It wouldn't be necessary to decelerate very much to accomplish that. Remember that the ISS must periodically boost its orbit to compensate for frictional losses, on that basis it can be assumed that the craft's dynamics are well-understood: http://www.heavens-above.com/IssHeight.aspx http://www.heavens-above.com/IssHeight.aspx

speeder 13y ago

Getting down is way easier than getting up. ISS has some engines, crashing on earth is very simple, you can just thrust in the opposite direction that you are going (thus falling into the planet, although slowly and probably astronauts can find the attacker and put it back into orbit before anything serious happens) or you can trust in a diagonal of sorts, to slow your speed AND toward the planet (if you just accelerate toward the planet is more probably that you will only create a elongated orbit, and if you insist, you will slingshot out of orbit).

redblacktree 13y ago
It seems like the harder part would be hitting New York. You could crash the ISS somewhere on Earth pretty trivially, if you had the controls.
- icambron 13y ago
  Assuming they didn't, you know, disconnect you while you were doing it. There are actual people up there; presumably they have manual overrides.
  - redblacktree 13y ago
    Right. I was assuming/implying a lot by saying, "if you had the controls." In the hypothetical where you have complete control of the ISS (despite manual overrides, et al), you'd still have a very hard time hitting a specific target on Earth. You could crash the thing fairly easily though. That's all I meant to say; I understand that this isn't a practical reality.
    - icambron 13y ago
      Yup, I understood. I was just adding a thought about how it was even more impractical than your comment suggested. Wasn't arguing against your point itself.
DoubleCluster 13y ago
I'm not sure the ISS has enough delta-v to get back down quickly. Lowering the orbit enough so that it will fall down in a few weeks is probably possible.
- lutusp 13y ago
  It's likely that a decent orbital dynamics model and a relatively small, well-timed delta-v would bring the ISS down within a rater small planned impact area. It wouldn't be necessary to decelerate very much to accomplish that. Remember that the ISS must periodically boost its orbit to compensate for frictional losses, on that basis it can be assumed that the craft's dynamics are well-understood: http://www.heavens-above.com/IssHeight.aspx http://www.heavens-above.com/IssHeight.aspx