4 ms·
The “more to it” is that ESA is gearing up to request funding for their AI project, billed as an automated tracking and avoidance manoeuvre planning system capa
by manicdee 7y ago
The “more to it” is that ESA is gearing up to request funding for their AI project, billed as an automated tracking and avoidance manoeuvre planning system capable of handling the vast numbers of objects and debris expected to be in orbit in the near future.
This was not about “SpaceX refused to move” but “we need money to build this automated system so we don’t have to do it all by hand,” and an additional level which is, how should the various satellite operators make their orbital parameters available to interested parties?
The situation is that ESA didn’t even know what kind of object the track represented, and they had to contact SpaceX to ask about it in the first place. Their job would have been easier (whether manual or automated) if SpaceX made the orbital parameters available for automated queries.
The last thing this is about is SpaceX being “arrogant” or “refusing to move a satellite.”
- dahdum 7y ago> The last thing this is about is SpaceX being “arrogant” or “refusing to move a satellite.” SpaceX entering ESA’s orbit and arrogantly refusing to move is an excellent showcase of the need for better avoidance systems, especially since they plan to launch 12k of them. It’s also an excellent warning of SpaceX’s ethical framework.
- manicdee 7y agoIt’s more likely to be an excellent example of why we should always wait two days to find out the real story. Clickbait headlines are poison, as are hearsay and anonymous sources using emotive language like “SpaceX refused” to move their satellite.