New SpaceX report on Starlink conjunctions and deorbits (a.k.a. dumping tons of metal/plastic/solar panels/computers into the upper atmosphere) scribd.com/document/883045105/…
Scariest part:
472 Starlinks were burned up in the atmosphere in Dec-May. Assuming each satellite is 800kg, and 50% aluminum by mass, that's 1 ton of aluminum PER DAY.
The natural infall rate of aluminum from meteoroids is 0.3 tons per day. Starlink has been ~3x that, for the last 6 months.
reshared this
Prof. Sam Lawler
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Kessler Syndrome update:
They report 144,000 collision avoidance maneuvers across the whole constellation in Dec-May. That's about one maneuver every 2 minutes.
Every 2 minutes there's a chance for a mistake that would lead to a very bad day in orbit. And as this paper shows (with Dr. Kessler himself as a co-author!), a very bad day at that altitude would lead to a runaway collisional cascade. No more satellites at that altitude! conference.sdo.esoc.esa.int/pr…
Prof. Sam Lawler
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •SpaceX spends a lot of time saying how safe they are with their threshhold for collision avoidance maneuvers, which is great. But they HAVE to be! With those densities, high collision probability conjunctions happen many times per day. It is impressive that they have been operating perfectly, but how long do they think they can keep this up with zero mistakes?
And what if all the Starlinks are not all fully burning up as they claim? That's a lot of stuff hitting the ground...
Dahie
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •tlohde
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •natural infall rate! What a cool term. Silly question, but i presume there isn't a natural flux going the other way?
Feel silly for having written that down. Gravity is a one-way street. Right? And post.
Petra van Cronenburg
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •I'm often asked by people who have no idea about satellites and believe that "everything vanishes in the air".
crazyeddie
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Sylvhem
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •leberschnitzel
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Zimmie
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •�
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Prof. Sam Lawler (@sundogplanets@mastodon.social)
MastodonCheapPontoon
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Jack C.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Brandon
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Laura
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Simplicator
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Bang intel
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •Flaming Cheeto
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler • • •a) how does this compare with baseline other satellites without Star Link and previous generations like iridium?
B) so starlink could theoretically offload the expense of running its own collision avoidance unit to some world government entity because the risk is shared even though the gain is not. Like doing now what would happen if they were to go bankrupt and cease operations