4 ms·
> the risk of crashing into the atmosphere is much reduced This isn't really a risk, it's a feature. "Crashing" into the atmosphere means you slow down from or
by gpm 5y ago
> the risk of crashing into the atmosphere is much reduced
This isn't really a risk, it's a feature. "Crashing" into the atmosphere means you slow down from orbital velocity and re-enter instead of polluting the orbital environment. It's much worse if you stay in orbit, occupying valuable space, and risking collisions that will create debris clouds occupying much more valuable space (and potentially resulting in chain reactions).
SpaceX has long since designed it's satellites to fully burn up as they re-enter the atmosphere to remove the risk that they'll hit someone on the ground, but even for satellites where that hasn't happened, it's generally preferred that they re-enter the atmosphere than hang out dead in valuable orbits.
- wumpus 5y agoIt's a risk, and the FCC requires that you plan on not killing people on the ground if your satellites are going to re-enter.
- gpm 5y agoCrashing into the ground is a risk, crashing into the atmosphere not so much.
- bpodgursky 5y agoThe Starlink satellites are tiny; they burn up in the upper atmosphere and never reach the ground.
- ClumsyPilot 5y agoAnd the FAA required that you plan on not killing people on the ground when your plane lands. He said it's not a risk in the sence that it's not something you avoid, it's something you use regularly. He did not mean "you can just YOLO it"
- mlindner 5y agoThat's the FAA requiring that, not FCC.