Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. I missed reading Starlink's latest conjunction report when it came out a bit over a month ago.

I missed reading Starlink's latest conjunction report when it came out a bit over a month ago.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
72 Indlæg 41 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • rl_dane@polymaths.socialR rl_dane@polymaths.social

    @sundogplanets

    "Kessler Syndrome as a Service." 🤦🏻‍♂️

    #KSaaS

    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
    sundogplanets@mastodon.social
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #49

    @rl_dane 😭

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • lediva@lediva.masto.hostL lediva@lediva.masto.host

      @sundogplanets Are you aware of any organizations working to reduce the chances of Kessler syndrome happening above us?

      badtux@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
      badtux@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
      badtux@mastodon.social
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #50

      @LeDiva @sundogplanets Kessler syndrome is a fair thing to worry about at higher orbits but at the low orbit that Starlink satellites live at, it would only be an issue for 1 to 5 years. Not that it wouldn't be a *massive* impact to be unable to get into space for 1 to 5 years... but it would not be an end to spacetravel for the rest of human history kind of event.

      lediva@lediva.masto.hostL 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • falken@qoto.orgF falken@qoto.org

        @davidtheeviloverlord @sundogplanets They are in so low orbits they de-orbit themselves if they ran out of fuel, or for some other reason couldn't safe themselves

        badtux@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
        badtux@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
        badtux@mastodon.social
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #51

        @falken @davidtheeviloverlord @sundogplanets In 1 to 5 years they will self-deorbit. Causing a collision cascade for 1 to 5 years essentially would shut off access to space for 1 to 5 years. That... would not be fun.

        They're also supposed to be de-orbited if they are running out of maneuvering fuel, using the last of that fuel. That's great in theory until it doesn't work.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

          They also list 4 "disposal failures" which are satellites that died before SpaceX purposefully chucked them into the atmosphere. This includes Starlink 34343 which either exploded or got hit by debris a couple months ago. https://keeptrack.space/deep-dive/starlink-34343

          4 out of thousands of launched satellites is pretty good. But when you have nearly 11,000 satellites, you have to operate COMPLETELY PERFECTLY every minute of every day, forever.

          Please don't fuck up more than you already have, SpaceX.

          dianea@lgbtqia.spaceD This user is from outside of this forum
          dianea@lgbtqia.spaceD This user is from outside of this forum
          dianea@lgbtqia.space
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #52

          @sundogplanets

          With the constant hailstones of Starlink debris striking populated areas, the likelihood of someone capturing CPU modules that contains private keys for the whole operation increases...

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • towerofthearchmage@chirp.enworld.orgT towerofthearchmage@chirp.enworld.org

            @sundogplanets say it does happen with a couple of these star link satellites? It'll be a cascading event, but how long will it last for? Months? Years? Decades?

            cy@fedicy.us.toC This user is from outside of this forum
            cy@fedicy.us.toC This user is from outside of this forum
            cy@fedicy.us.to
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #53
            Depends on how high the debris are orbiting. This page suggests that 600km high would take decades, past 800km would take centuries, and anything past 1000km is effectively up there for good. Starlink satellites orbit at about 550km. space.com said something about SpaceX having to lower them down to 480km.
            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

              Oh gosh I just did the math on the maneuver rate, which I couldn't bring myself to do earlier. More than 207,000 collision avoidance maneuvers in 6 months.

              That means that somewhere in the Starlink megaconstellation, a satellite is performing a collision avoidance maneuver EVERY 1.25 MINUTES (EVERY 75 SECONDS)

              AAAHHHH I'M SURE THAT'S FINE.

              And now I find myself reading about asteroid collisional cascades. For no particular reason...

              jesterchen@social.tchncs.deJ This user is from outside of this forum
              jesterchen@social.tchncs.deJ This user is from outside of this forum
              jesterchen@social.tchncs.de
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #54

              @sundogplanets Do you know https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/ ?

              sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • jesterchen@social.tchncs.deJ jesterchen@social.tchncs.de

                @sundogplanets Do you know https://outerspaceinstitute.ca/crashclock/ ?

                sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #55

                @jesterchen Yes, I helped make that.

                jesterchen@social.tchncs.deJ 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • badtux@mastodon.socialB badtux@mastodon.social

                  @LeDiva @sundogplanets Kessler syndrome is a fair thing to worry about at higher orbits but at the low orbit that Starlink satellites live at, it would only be an issue for 1 to 5 years. Not that it wouldn't be a *massive* impact to be unable to get into space for 1 to 5 years... but it would not be an end to spacetravel for the rest of human history kind of event.

                  lediva@lediva.masto.hostL This user is from outside of this forum
                  lediva@lediva.masto.hostL This user is from outside of this forum
                  lediva@lediva.masto.host
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #56

                  @badtux That still sounds pretty bad though?

                  badtux@mastodon.socialB 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                    @jesterchen Yes, I helped make that.

                    jesterchen@social.tchncs.deJ This user is from outside of this forum
                    jesterchen@social.tchncs.deJ This user is from outside of this forum
                    jesterchen@social.tchncs.de
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #57

                    @sundogplanets Oops. 🙈️

                    Thanks for that. 🙂

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • lediva@lediva.masto.hostL lediva@lediva.masto.host

                      @badtux That still sounds pretty bad though?

                      badtux@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                      badtux@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                      badtux@mastodon.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #58

                      @LeDiva Pretty bad. But not an end to spacetravel for the rest of human history kind of bad.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                        @fiigvam @swordgeek We're beyond the runaway limit. If there's a collision in altitudes beyond the runaway limit, that means that debris pieces will continue causing more collisions. But the timescale for those secondary collisions could be years. But the rate will continue to increase...

                        Here's a recent paper by Hugh Lewis and Donald Kessler (yes, that Kessler) that's super dense but talks about it. Figure 16. https://conference.sdo.esoc.esa.int/proceedings/sdc9/paper/305/SDC9-paper305.pdf

                        fiigvam@ravenation.clubF This user is from outside of this forum
                        fiigvam@ravenation.clubF This user is from outside of this forum
                        fiigvam@ravenation.club
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #59

                        @sundogplanets @swordgeek oh interesting! So regardless of the in orbit maneuvers that starlink is actively performing, there is at least some patch of orbit that is in slow but increasing cascade Kessler syndrome?

                        sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                          I missed reading Starlink's latest conjunction report when it came out a bit over a month ago. I just skimmed through it and I think I need to go lay down for a while. It's terrifying how close we are to major collisions in orbit all the time... (I especially love the note about how space-track.org being offline briefly caused them to miss a potential collision... SO FRAGILE AAUGH)

                          Article summarizing the report here: https://ca.pcmag.com/networking/16653/260-starlink-satellites-burn-up-in-earths-atmosphere-as-more-head-for-fiery-ends

                          Full report here: https://www.scribd.com/document/1057502572/SpaceX-Gen1-Gen2-Semi-Annual-Report-7-1-26

                          swb72@mstdn.plusS This user is from outside of this forum
                          swb72@mstdn.plusS This user is from outside of this forum
                          swb72@mstdn.plus
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #60

                          @sundogplanets It's because of the potential for collision that SpaceX programmed their satellites to deorbit and burn up at the end of their useful lives rather than move into the usual 'parking' orbit.

                          sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • swb72@mstdn.plusS swb72@mstdn.plus

                            @sundogplanets It's because of the potential for collision that SpaceX programmed their satellites to deorbit and burn up at the end of their useful lives rather than move into the usual 'parking' orbit.

                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #61

                            @swb72 There is no parking orbit for LEO, just for GEO

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • fiigvam@ravenation.clubF fiigvam@ravenation.club

                              @sundogplanets @swordgeek oh interesting! So regardless of the in orbit maneuvers that starlink is actively performing, there is at least some patch of orbit that is in slow but increasing cascade Kessler syndrome?

                              sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                              sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                              sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #62

                              @fiigvam @swordgeek Yes. Scary.

                              fiigvam@ravenation.clubF 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                @fiigvam @swordgeek Yes. Scary.

                                fiigvam@ravenation.clubF This user is from outside of this forum
                                fiigvam@ravenation.clubF This user is from outside of this forum
                                fiigvam@ravenation.club
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #63

                                @sundogplanets @swordgeek phew. Well then. Thanks for enlightening us and giving answers!

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • davidtheeviloverlord@mastodon.socialD davidtheeviloverlord@mastodon.social

                                  @sundogplanets

                                  Correct me if I'm wrong but, collision avoidance manoeuvres cost propellant. A satellite can only carry a small amount of propellant. More manoeuvres cost more propellant. Nobody is refuelling satellites in orbit.

                                  I'm sure it will be fine.

                                  croyle@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
                                  croyle@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
                                  croyle@wandering.shop
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #64

                                  @davidtheeviloverlord @sundogplanets I was thinking the same thing. Increased maneuvers = more fuel = shorter lifespans = more replacement satellites needed and so on.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                    I missed reading Starlink's latest conjunction report when it came out a bit over a month ago. I just skimmed through it and I think I need to go lay down for a while. It's terrifying how close we are to major collisions in orbit all the time... (I especially love the note about how space-track.org being offline briefly caused them to miss a potential collision... SO FRAGILE AAUGH)

                                    Article summarizing the report here: https://ca.pcmag.com/networking/16653/260-starlink-satellites-burn-up-in-earths-atmosphere-as-more-head-for-fiery-ends

                                    Full report here: https://www.scribd.com/document/1057502572/SpaceX-Gen1-Gen2-Semi-Annual-Report-7-1-26

                                    ghostonthehalfshell@masto.aiG This user is from outside of this forum
                                    ghostonthehalfshell@masto.aiG This user is from outside of this forum
                                    ghostonthehalfshell@masto.ai
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #65

                                    @sundogplanets

                                    Who would’ve thought a bunch of Rich assholes could kill the sky.

                                    Space will be the final frontier.. When we can get back to launching anything into orbit again

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                      I missed reading Starlink's latest conjunction report when it came out a bit over a month ago. I just skimmed through it and I think I need to go lay down for a while. It's terrifying how close we are to major collisions in orbit all the time... (I especially love the note about how space-track.org being offline briefly caused them to miss a potential collision... SO FRAGILE AAUGH)

                                      Article summarizing the report here: https://ca.pcmag.com/networking/16653/260-starlink-satellites-burn-up-in-earths-atmosphere-as-more-head-for-fiery-ends

                                      Full report here: https://www.scribd.com/document/1057502572/SpaceX-Gen1-Gen2-Semi-Annual-Report-7-1-26

                                      angiebaby@mas.toA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      angiebaby@mas.toA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      angiebaby@mas.to
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #66

                                      @sundogplanets

                                      Even Elon Musk's own satellites want to kill themselves rather than work for him.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                        Oh gosh I just did the math on the maneuver rate, which I couldn't bring myself to do earlier. More than 207,000 collision avoidance maneuvers in 6 months.

                                        That means that somewhere in the Starlink megaconstellation, a satellite is performing a collision avoidance maneuver EVERY 1.25 MINUTES (EVERY 75 SECONDS)

                                        AAAHHHH I'M SURE THAT'S FINE.

                                        And now I find myself reading about asteroid collisional cascades. For no particular reason...

                                        erik@mastodon.infrageeks.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
                                        erik@mastodon.infrageeks.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
                                        erik@mastodon.infrageeks.social
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #67

                                        @sundogplanets @wendynather All of the sudden all those asteroid near misses start getting a lot more interesting. Don’t have to hit the Earth, just swoosh by in LEO leaving a wake of destruction

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                          I mean, to be fair, they have done it perfectly so far. No Starlink collisions.

                                          But there is a shitload of untracked, lethal debris orbiting around up there. And they are completely dependent on so many systems (like space-track.org, apparently).

                                          And our future use of orbit is completely dependent on Starlink operating perfectly, every minute of every day, forever.

                                          ysegrim@furry.engineerY This user is from outside of this forum
                                          ysegrim@furry.engineerY This user is from outside of this forum
                                          ysegrim@furry.engineer
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #68

                                          @sundogplanets … by a company who has recently been merged with a company whose business model is basically selling vibe engineering/vibe everythinging tools to the industry.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper