I missed reading Starlink's latest conjunction report when it came out a bit over a month ago.
-
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.
@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
-
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.
*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.
-
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 ONE POINT TWENTY-FIVE MIN-U-TAYS?!
-
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.
@sundogplanets This is very 'complaining about how bad traffic is without considering that YOU are the traffic' and hence the problem.
-
@sundogplanets This is very 'complaining about how bad traffic is without considering that YOU are the traffic' and hence the problem.
@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)
-
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 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.
-
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.
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. -
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.
@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.
-
@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.
@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.
-
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
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.
-
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.
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.
-
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
@sundogplanets
I’m old enough to remember laying out in the back yard late at night to catch a glimpse of the International Space Station as it made it earthly revolutions roughly every 90 minutes or so. Was just enthralled by the technology. No more, sadly no more. #TooMuchOfAGoodThing -
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...
Systems requiring so much active corrections to maintain a safe state are inherently bound to fail over time.
-
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.
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.
-
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.
@Amgine If they wanted Kessler Syndrome they could have very easily done it already.
-
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
@sundogplanets Are we better off if a (smaller?) cascade happens early, and starlink needs to deorbit as many of its satellites as it can?
-
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.
@sundogplanets I feel like there's gonna be a day where they just abandon it all for whatever asinine reason and it rains space junk all over, all at once, with no accountability
-
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
@sundogplanets So a modern Ted Kaczynski could simply DDoS space-track.org?
-
@startswithabang Some of the foundational work for that is here: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.21328
@sundogplanets Bah, science in its infancy is one of the most promising, and frustrating (for its lack of definitive answers), types all at once!
-
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.
@sundogplanets I dont see any reason to freak out about it. They are low orbit sats with natural fallback of 5 years, spacex could go bust and all the sats left and it'd all be gone in a few years.
They all are designed to full burn up before risk to ground and no evidence of them failing to fully burn after hundreds of burns.The real shit you should worry about is high orbit sats that are 20 years old and actually able to cause Kessler syndrome.
