4/ Cosmos 1408 was a Tselina-D, which doesn't have a known history of spontaneous fragmentation (from fuel or batteries): ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/2018…
5/ It was also a LARGE spacecraft (~ 2,000 kg) so if it was a hypervelocity collision (large debris or ASAT KKV), we'd expect hundreds to thousands of resulting debris space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/tseli…
6/ The ISS will keep passing through the Cosmos 1408 debris field every ~90 min or so for the next day, which is why they've been directed to prep for potential collisions:
7/ It seems Russia posted a NOTAM for a missile launch from 0200-0500Z on 15-17 Nov, which roughly corresponded to a flight test of a Nudol DA-ASAT out of Plesetsk
10/ So, to sum up, we know there was a debris event and its PLAUSIBLE it was caused by an ASAT test but do not yet have confirmation. If we get reports of a much larger debris cloud, then that will be a big sign...
11/ ADDENDUM - The US has confirmed it was an ASAT test that created thousands of pieces of debris
1/ Another great (and troubling) episode with @aaronstein1@wslafoy and @ArmsControlWonk, but I do want to talk a bit about the mention of the legal status of FOBS (sorry <foooooooobbbsss>) under the Outer Space Treaty
2/ On the pod, they mentioned that FOBS was in part designed as a way to get around the Outer Space Treaty, specifically the first part of Article IV on placement/stationing of nuclear weapons in orbit
3/ Sources as esteemed as the the United States government have indeed argued that FOBS does not violate this prohibition, as outlined in the DOD Law of War Manual dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Docu…
1/ Ok so I guess it's time for a thread on the whole "Biden doesn't care about space" thing
2/ Lots of griping and commentary from the #space community about the lack of focus/interest on space from the Biden Admin so far. Let's unpack where that comes from and why
3/ Part of it comes from wonks like me who are concerned that there are not any space policy appointments at and wish to see more movement on space issues
1/ Lots of buzz about the UK bidding to resurrect OneWeb as a GNSS system, short thread trying to unpack what I think is going on & the challenges in doing so (caveat is not a lot of public info on this right now)
2/ According to @FT (ft.com/content/a1da90…) the UK govt plans to put up £500M to help bring OneWeb out of bankruptcy and turn their system into some sort of GPS augmentation
3/ Apparently this is seen by the UK govt as a better alternative than the £5B (and more!) of building a completely independent UK GNSS, which was always an absurd idea anyways
1/ Thread with my thoughts on yesterday's EO on space resources: whitehouse.gov/presidential-a… ;TLDR, I generally agree with the policy but think the EO was unnecessary and could generate blowback
2/ First, the EO doesn't change anything about US policy on space resources and it's a policy I generally agree with. Since 1960s, US has consistently said you can use space resources (water, regolith, minerals, etc) w/out violating Art. II of the OST.
3/ Put plainly, you can fish in the ocean without claiming ownership of the entirety of said ocean. It gets a bit more complicated when you consider using up an entire asteroid, but I think that's an edge case we don't have to worry about for a long while
1/ Yesterday the Air Force delivered the first report to Congress on how it plans to stand up the #SpaceForce (velosteam.com/wp-content/upl…). Thread with a few things I found interesting in it:
2/ First, a reminder of just how early in the process we are for figuring out what the Space Force will actually be like and do. It will be years before some of the fundamental issues like acquisitions and recruiting are fully dealt with
3/ This list of guiding principles looks good on paper, but will be hard to stick to in reality and there's quite a bit of wriggle room