3 ms·

NASA objects to new megaconstellation, citing risk of “catastrophic collison”

9 points by lakis 6y ago

londons_explore 6y ago
Seems like NASA's complaint of "it'll be too hard to avoid collisions" is a weak one... With software automation all these events could be handled automatically. The cynic in me says NASA has been encouraged to put in an objection by SpaceX who run a competing constellation. Spacex's constellation requires special ground stations, unlike this which can transmit direct to an existing 4G phone. That makes this a big business risk for SpaceX.
- conception 6y ago
  Assuming they do the job right - “Finally, the space agency is concerned because AST has never built a satellite remotely close in size to the 1-ton or larger vehicles that will populate its constellation. Given this lack of experience, it is expected that 10 percent or more of the satellites may fail, making them unable to maneuver to avoid collisions. “ I rather not have new players testing the waters of their capabilities with a mega constellation of satellites that won’t deorbit if they fail.
  - cbanek 6y ago
    You nailed it on the "assuming they do the job right." The other part is that there aren't any orbital tow trucks to get rogue or broken satellites out of orbit or out of colliding paths. Plus since you never know where it might happen, and the delta-v would be pretty extreme to go very far or very fast, let alone both which would be needed to prevent a collision of an out of control satellite. The penalty of screwing up could be large, and there aren't many mitigations available.
    - londons_explore 6y ago
      With a 900 square meter antenna array, they'll deorbit pretty quick. I'd guess that's the reason they're at the altitude they are - at lower orbits they'd decay too quickly.
- consumer451 6y ago
  > Finally, the space agency is concerned because AST has never built a satellite remotely close in size to the 1-ton or larger vehicles that will populate its constellation. Given this lack of experience, it is expected that 10 percent or more of the satellites may fail, making them unable to maneuver to avoid collisions. NASA found the risk of a catastrophic collision to be "unacceptably high." That is just one of the arguments that sound compelling at first read.
tagh 6y ago
I'm glad NASA is doing the right thing here. I hope that non-US organisations were also able to submit comment, as the potential consequences are truly global.

9 points by lakis 6y ago

Seems like NASA's complaint of "it'll be too hard to avoid collisions" is a weak one... With software automation all these events could be handled automatically. The cynic in me says NASA has been encouraged to put in an objection by SpaceX who run a competing constellation. Spacex's constellation requires special ground stations, unlike this which can transmit direct to an existing 4G phone. That makes this a big business risk for SpaceX.

conception 6y ago
Assuming they do the job right - “Finally, the space agency is concerned because AST has never built a satellite remotely close in size to the 1-ton or larger vehicles that will populate its constellation. Given this lack of experience, it is expected that 10 percent or more of the satellites may fail, making them unable to maneuver to avoid collisions. “ I rather not have new players testing the waters of their capabilities with a mega constellation of satellites that won’t deorbit if they fail.
- cbanek 6y ago
  You nailed it on the "assuming they do the job right." The other part is that there aren't any orbital tow trucks to get rogue or broken satellites out of orbit or out of colliding paths. Plus since you never know where it might happen, and the delta-v would be pretty extreme to go very far or very fast, let alone both which would be needed to prevent a collision of an out of control satellite. The penalty of screwing up could be large, and there aren't many mitigations available.
  - londons_explore 6y ago
    With a 900 square meter antenna array, they'll deorbit pretty quick. I'd guess that's the reason they're at the altitude they are - at lower orbits they'd decay too quickly.
consumer451 6y ago
> Finally, the space agency is concerned because AST has never built a satellite remotely close in size to the 1-ton or larger vehicles that will populate its constellation. Given this lack of experience, it is expected that 10 percent or more of the satellites may fail, making them unable to maneuver to avoid collisions. NASA found the risk of a catastrophic collision to be "unacceptably high." That is just one of the arguments that sound compelling at first read.

tagh 6y ago

I'm glad NASA is doing the right thing here. I hope that non-US organisations were also able to submit comment, as the potential consequences are truly global.