Ms. Dana Priest's article in The Washington Post, to which Jeffrey Lewis has kindly provided the URL, may confirm my suspicion that USA 144 (99028A / 25744), launched 1999 May 22 from VAFB, is Misty 2: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56171-2004Dec10.html excerpt of opening paragraph: <<<< New Spy Satellite Debated On Hill Some Question Price and Need By Dana Priest Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, December 11, 2004; Page A01 The United States is building a new generation of spy satellites designed to orbit undetected, in a highly classified program that has provoked opposition in closed congressional sessions where lawmakers have questioned its necessity and rapidly escalating price, according to U.S. officials. >>>> Since June 1999, several of us have been tracking an object from the launch of USA 144, in a 2700 x 3100 km, 63.4 deg orbit, which at first seemed to be the payload, based upon its brightness. However, in August 2002, after a re-analysis of our observations, I reported my finding that its orbit is significantly affected by solar radiation pressure, from which I deduced that it has the characteristics of low-mass debris or a decoy, not a payload: http://satobs.org/seesat/Aug-2002/0045.html I also compared and contrasted the launch of USA 144 with that of Misty 1, and speculated that the real USA 144 might be Misty 2: http://satobs.org/seesat/Aug-2002/0075.html Ms. Priest quotes three sources that seem to confirm this without relying upon orbital analysis: 1. "[the] first craft was launched from the space shuttle Atlantis on March 1, 1990" ... "A second Misty satellite was launched nearly a decade later and is in operation, sources said." This quote is the most specific of all. 2. "The satellite in question would be the third and final version in a series of spacecraft funded under a classified program once known as Misty, officials said." This seems to fit with the notion that two Misty satellites have already been launched. 3. "The stealth satellite, which would probably become the largest single-item expenditure in the $40 billion intelligence budget, is to be launched in the next five years and is meant to replace an existing stealth satellite, according to officials." If the reference to "an existing" satellite can be taken literally, then that makes sense, given that Misty 1, launched 14 years ago, likely would have been de-orbited by know, and Misty 2, launched just 5 years ago, likely would remain in orbit. Certainly, if Misty 2 has been successfully orbited, and if it is similar in concept and mission to Misty 1, then the launch of USA 144 is the only one that it could be, because the payloads of all other similar launches have been accounted for. Ms. Priest also cites an article in Novosti Kosmonavtiki that appears to rely on orbital analysis: "Circumstantial evidence of that satellite's existence was outlined in the April [2004] issue of a Russian space magazine, Novosti Kosmonavtiki. According to a translation for The Washington Post, the article suggested that a satellite launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California in 1999 may be the second-generation Misty craft and noted that the satellite was put into orbit along with "a large number of debris," a likely deception method." If anyone has a copy of the article, I would be interested in a summary. Ted Molczan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive: http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 11 2004 - 12:28:44 EST