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

[lediva@lediva.masto.host]

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

[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?

[startswithabang@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets Would be a "fun" calculation to do to see, based on our understanding of what Aluminum oxide does to the ozone layer, how many deorbiting starlinks it would take to destroy the ozone layer entirely!

[visikde@mstdn.plus]

@sundogplanets
15000 satellites in the array when complete, 5 year lifespan = 24 satellites deorbiting per day.
Wait until there are 1000000 servers in orbit yielding 500 or so deorbiting per day

[sundogplanets@mastodon.social]

@startswithabang Some of the foundational work for that is here: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.21328

[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...

[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.

[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.

[sundogplanets@mastodon.social]

Like their last report, they also have a Shit List of which objects Starlink had to maneuver for the most often, and complained a lot about it. "SpaceX coordinated with other satellite operators hundreds of times over the reporting period"

What they fail to say is that this is because anyone who wants to travel to higher orbits is REQUIRED to coordinate with them, because they effectively control Low Earth Orbit.

[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

[davidtheeviloverlord@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets

*looks at Musk's record of SpaceX rockets operating perfectly, and not undergoing rapid unscheduled disassembly at all*

I'm sure it will be fine.

No Starlink collisions.

That we know about.

[nyquildotorg@gts.nyquil.org]

@sundogplanets ONE POINT TWENTY-FIVE MIN-U-TAYS?!

[debcha@saturation.social]

@sundogplanets This is very 'complaining about how bad traffic is without considering that YOU are the traffic' and hence the problem.

[sundogplanets@mastodon.social]

@debcha That is pretty much the tone of every single one of these reports. It would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous. "We are annoyed that we are the only operator who is required to do this reporting" (Yes, you own 2/3 of ALL SATELLITES that's why)

[liebach@mastodon.art]

@sundogplanets I can't stand it. Can't we just get it over with and get that Kessler syndrome done. So stressful waiting for a disaster, feels worse than the disaster itself.

The upside is that it'll be obvious to everyone that we have Musk to thank for it. He'll be popular, I'm sure. He'll get interviewed, and he'll say something really ridiculously stupid. It'll be great.

[hnapel@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets

Which objects are those? Asking for a friend.

I read while Envisat ️ operates in a higher orbit, for polar shell Starlink satellites the upper stage or the satellites themselves may cross Envisat's altitude band during initial deployment.

[reijomancer@defcon.social]

@sundogplanets You just gave me a harrowing train of thought.

What if we as a populace have become desensitized to MAD via nuclear weapons to the point of creating another MAD over low earth collision cascade?

At this point, the press to put insane amounts of birds up with little oversight feels a bit like the start of another cold war.

"Pay/allly with us or we'll deorbit one of ours into one of yours. We have more."

And it wouldn't be a stretch for these jokers to think of themselves so highly as to consider it in the vein of another Manhattan project.

[reijomancer@defcon.social]

@sundogplanets So anything in any long-dwell or geosynch orbit has to pass through the X-Wall and have its token worth extracted.

Totally not a stretch.

[amgine@mamot.fr]

@sundogplanets

I have been of the opinion for a while now this is deliberate. The goal is, in fact, to precipitate a Kessler syndrome. It fits with a number of other nihilistic actions M Musk has taken, and his particular attraction to activities in which he gains recompense for doing harms.

[sundogplanets@mastodon.social]

They also have a list of deorbits, I haven't managed to get the pdf from the FCC (because their website fucking sucks, on purpose I'm sure). And scribd wants me to pay to download it.

Anyway, the PC mag article says 260 Starlinks reentered. At some point I'll count up the gen 1 and gen 2 and get a mass estimate. But that's 1 or 2 a day. And a lot of new weird metal in the stratosphere. Thanks, SpaceX.