Talk:AsiaSat 8

Derelict rocket body space debris?

Following the apparently successful launch, the US govevernment's NORAD agency is tracking two objects in Earth orbit.

• object 2014-046A/40107 in a 199 x 35816 km x 24.35 degree inclination elliptical orbit.
• object 2014-046B/40108 in a 198 x 35768 km x 24.34 degree elliptical orbit.

One is presumably the AsiaSat 8 commsat, which will shortly circularize and fit into the geosynchronous Clarke belt for many years.

The other is presumably the second stage rocket body of the Falcon 9, and will be derelict for some amount of time, but with an c. 198 km periapsis, may not remain as space debris too long. Need to learn more on this to update the article. Cheers. N2e (talk) 16:12, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

With a perigee of 198km, it won't be in orbit for long. If that were a circular orbit it would only last a couple of days. As it is, maybe a few weeks, tops. Here's a paper about how to calculate this using a simple computer program. — Gopher65_talk 17:25, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

That is not correct; it remains in orbit as of 31 December 2014. See below for details, as well as for info on how it's sister launch vehicle upper stage may have scattered rocket debris across a part of Brazil, and even damaged a house. N2e (talk) 14:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I've put a short summary statement in the article, with a citation. It seems to have dropped to 195 km perigee in the past week (or there may perhaps be some imprecision in how well the perigee can be measured/calculated. Either way, that source will allow tracking it until its reentry. Until then it is space debris. N2e (talk) 21:30, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

One question: why should this be in this article at all? This is about the satellite, and putting a section about the rocket carrying it in this article is hitting a problem that most spaceflight fans have - that they focus too much on the rockets and too little on what's on board. I suggest move this to an appropriate Falcon 9 article. Galactic Penguin SST (talk) 03:29, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The article on the primary payload for each launch is also the article on the launch that launched it. Just standard convention. — Gopher65_talk 13:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Still, why is this information relevant? Every standard GTO mission that doesn't perform a deorbit burn leaves the upper stage in a decaying orbit, so it's not particularly noteworthy. At most the article should mention the booster's international designation code for anyone curious enough to look it up, no need to include orbital parameters that no one is going to update A(Ch) 01:57, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I think it is relevant to readers of the global Wikipedia that a satellite launch has left a piece of orbital debris in orbit. It is both verifiable and has been cited. As for updates you were concerned about, it would appear that me coming back to this article, one month on, to check and then update the status of the decaying rocket body would demonstrate that it won't necessarily be outdated long term because noone cares about it. I also agree with Gopher65's comment that the standard convention is for the launch content to be in the article on the primary payload, who after all contracted for and purchased the launch, unless special conditions make the launch particularly notable so as to meet the general notability guideline itself. I'm sorry I missed the conversation until now; will watch this article to discuss further as desired. N2e (talk) 12:48, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough. The orbital parameters are a bit overkill since it's a standard GTO, but having the date of eventual decay will certainly be of interest A(Ch) 04:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

For what it is worth, two things:

1) the orb parms for #40108 as of 31 Dec are 174 km perigee and 34206 km apogee, with semi-major access down to 23561 (from ny20)

2) the Falcon 9 Flight 12 upper stage from the AsiaSat 6 launch on 7 Sep 2014 apparently reentered in the past few days, and left objects in Brazil, including damage to a house. Some initial notes about what has been found, and correlated, to date are over on the Talk page there.

But what this does show (assuming it is verified) is that the derelict rocket body upper stage of Falcon 9 v1.1 launch vehicles can reach the surface of Earth under some conditions, and can do some damage. While the probabilities for human harm are low, it is hard to make the case that verifiable information about the decaying orbit of one of these pieces of human-caused space debris is not sufficiently worthy to be in Wikipedia, assuming it is sourced. N2e (talk) 14:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on AsiaSat 8. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150119133755/http://www.asiasat.com/asiasat/EN/upload/doc/pressrelease/news_e20140805.pdf to http://www.asiasat.com/asiasat/EN/upload/doc/pressrelease/news_e20140805.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:43, 8 November 2017 (UTC)