6 ms·

Well, it was also only 4 satellites. The FCC is also probably just happy that they are being consulted at all. If this was done by a fully foreign company (or

by stale2002 8y ago

Well, it was also only 4 satellites. The FCC is also probably just happy that they are being consulted at all. If this was done by a fully foreign company (or perhaps sold to a foreign shell company), then there would be nothing that the FCC could do about it.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> If this was done by a fully foreign company (or perhaps sold to a foreign shell company), then there would be nothing that the FCC could do about it If this were done by a fully-foreign company, the American taxpayer wouldn't be liable for its damages. If an American satellite crashes into a French satellite and the American can't pay, ITU rules make the U.S. government liable.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  Knowing this, I've never been more supportive of the US military taking necessary measures to prevent unauthorized commercial launches from reaching orbit.
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    > unauthorized commercial launches I've never heard of this happening. Source? If you're building a rocket, you're going to land a 3-letter agency inspection long before launch because of your procurement activities. (I've seen this happen twice, once in college and once at a rocket company.) That said, if someone were literally launching a rogue missile, yes, that would light up NORAD and trigger air defense systems.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - DanBC 8y ago
      > I've never heard of this happening. Source? The article that we're responding to is about an unauthorised commercial launch.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
        > The article that we're responding to is about an unauthorised commercial launch The payload was unauthorized, but the launch was properly sanctioned by the Indian government. I read "unauthorized commercial launch" to mean "guy pops up a rocket without telling anyone and the military shoots it down," for which I was curious if there is precedent.
- jessaustin 8y ago
  Has "the American taxpayer" paid out a great deal for this in the past? What percentage of the annual budget? Satellites generally stay in their orbits, don't they? That's my understanding of the term "orbit". How would we determine that one satellite is guilty and the other isn't? Would it be whichever fired a rocket most recently?
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    > Has "the American taxpayer" paid out a great deal for this in the past? What percentage of the annual budget? Not really, as it's a rare occurrence. Though it does remind me of the time NASA got a AU$400 for littering in Australia with parts of Skylab.. https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/34928/did-nasa-refuse-to-pay-a-400-fine-for-littering-caused-by-the-deorbiting-of-sky https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/34928/did-nasa-... > Satellites generally stay in their orbits, don't they? They don't, the orbits decay due to drag from residual atmosphere, and other effects, including solar radiation. Generally, the lower you are, the faster your orbit will decay. Consider that ISS turns their solar panels to act as glider wings when on the night side, just to lower air drag. You can actually see their height chart here: https://www.heavens-above.com/IssHeight.aspx; https://www.heavens-above.com/IssHeight.aspx; you can see how they gradually lose altitude, and have to burn fuel to boost back every month or two. Point being, satellites need to be actively tracked, and their orbits recalculated periodically. Each new object is a little bit of extra work for some people. The procedures are there to ensure this doesn't get out of hand, especially now with tiny satellites that are very hard to track.
unit91 8y ago
From the article: > Through Swarm, Spangelo [CEO] sought to develop and launch a constellation of at least 100 small satellites.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago

> If this was done by a fully foreign company (or perhaps sold to a foreign shell company), then there would be nothing that the FCC could do about it If this were done by a fully-foreign company, the American taxpayer wouldn't be liable for its damages. If an American satellite crashes into a French satellite and the American can't pay, ITU rules make the U.S. government liable.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
Knowing this, I've never been more supportive of the US military taking necessary measures to prevent unauthorized commercial launches from reaching orbit.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > unauthorized commercial launches I've never heard of this happening. Source? If you're building a rocket, you're going to land a 3-letter agency inspection long before launch because of your procurement activities. (I've seen this happen twice, once in college and once at a rocket company.) That said, if someone were literally launching a rogue missile, yes, that would light up NORAD and trigger air defense systems.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - DanBC 8y ago
    > I've never heard of this happening. Source? The article that we're responding to is about an unauthorised commercial launch.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
      > The article that we're responding to is about an unauthorised commercial launch The payload was unauthorized, but the launch was properly sanctioned by the Indian government. I read "unauthorized commercial launch" to mean "guy pops up a rocket without telling anyone and the military shoots it down," for which I was curious if there is precedent.
jessaustin 8y ago
Has "the American taxpayer" paid out a great deal for this in the past? What percentage of the annual budget? Satellites generally stay in their orbits, don't they? That's my understanding of the term "orbit". How would we determine that one satellite is guilty and the other isn't? Would it be whichever fired a rocket most recently?
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  > Has "the American taxpayer" paid out a great deal for this in the past? What percentage of the annual budget? Not really, as it's a rare occurrence. Though it does remind me of the time NASA got a AU$400 for littering in Australia with parts of Skylab.. https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/34928/did-nasa-refuse-to-pay-a-400-fine-for-littering-caused-by-the-deorbiting-of-sky https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/34928/did-nasa-... > Satellites generally stay in their orbits, don't they? They don't, the orbits decay due to drag from residual atmosphere, and other effects, including solar radiation. Generally, the lower you are, the faster your orbit will decay. Consider that ISS turns their solar panels to act as glider wings when on the night side, just to lower air drag. You can actually see their height chart here: https://www.heavens-above.com/IssHeight.aspx; https://www.heavens-above.com/IssHeight.aspx; you can see how they gradually lose altitude, and have to burn fuel to boost back every month or two. Point being, satellites need to be actively tracked, and their orbits recalculated periodically. Each new object is a little bit of extra work for some people. The procedures are there to ensure this doesn't get out of hand, especially now with tiny satellites that are very hard to track.

unit91 8y ago

From the article: > Through Swarm, Spangelo [CEO] sought to develop and launch a constellation of at least 100 small satellites.