5 ms·
The ESA asked SpaceX to move to avoid a collision, and they refused. What would happen if a private airline refused the FAA telling them to redirect to avoid a
by lukeschlather 7y ago
The ESA asked SpaceX to move to avoid a collision, and they refused. What would happen if a private airline refused the FAA telling them to redirect to avoid a collision, forcing another aircraft to take evasive action?
It definitely is political, and it's going to become a bigger problem if SpaceX's approach to potential collisions is just to play chicken.
- mikeash 7y agoThe ESA isnt a governing authority here. The proper analogy would be two planes in uncontrolled airspace on course to come uncomfortably close. One asks the other to change course, and the other refuses. No FAA involved. This sort of thing actually happens with some regularity. Airliners and other fancy planes carry TCAS systems which can detect other planes and tell the pilot to maneuver to avoid a collision. If the other plane has TCAS, the two units will coordinate to ensure they don’t both dodge the same way. TCAS can also detect planes that don’t have TCAS, which would be virtually all small planes, and in that instance the TCAS-equipped plane will maneuver to avoid on its own. Airliners routinely fly though airspace where not all traffic is under positive control by ATC. Sometimes they end up on a course that sets off TCAS. The airliner will then maneuver to avoid the collision while the light aircraft pilot remains blissfully unaware, unless they happen to see the airliner fly past.
- throw0101a 7y ago> The ESA isnt a governing authority here. You're not wrong, but annoying the folks that may be involved in regulatory approval for your venture to get commercially licensed is not prudent.
- dahdum 7y agoIt’s Musk, playing stupid games for stupid prizes seems to be his favorite hobby.
- manicdee 7y agoThe bigger issue is that ESA is coming up to an important administrative date in November where their future budget will be determined, and they want money for their automation program. So they have to portray space as dangerous, ESA processes as desperately in need of improvement, and this specific example of a super expensive research satellite coming close to part of a future megaconstellation makes for great attention-grabbing headlines. That it was SpaceX that ESA got to throw under the bus was the cherry on the cake.
- dahdum 7y agoSpaceX playing chicken with cheap disposable Starlinks against multibillion euro public satellites does make space dangerous.
- manicdee 7y agoNobody is playing chicken here. The SpaceX satellite is for all intents and purposes inert, since it is incapable of significantly adjusting its orbit. You know the old joke about the US Navy warship giving way to the second class seaman, right?
- Rebelgecko 7y ago>The SpaceX satellite is for all intents and purposes inert, since it is incapable of significantly adjusting its orbit. If SpaceX is actively deorbiting the satellite, it's not inert.
- Doxin 7y agoHaving enough thrust for a deorbit burn doesn't mean having enough thrust to avoid a collision.
- HeadsUpHigh 7y agoThe ESA isn't the FAA. It has fuck all authorization over SpaceX and European satellites even.