5 ms·

Why does the civilized world allow Starlink then? They've proven - that with just 1,500 objects in orbit - can cause 50% of all close encounters in orbit[1].

Why does the civilized world allow Starlink then? They've proven - that with just 1,500 objects in orbit - can cause 50% of all close encounters in orbit[1]. They plan to have 10X more objects in space soon and will probably account for 90+% of close calls by then, and 100% of collisions. This is Elon "we're training our alpha product in a production environment, thank you for dying to train the neural net" Musk we're talking about. Do think this darling of the "civilized" West gives a single nanoparticle of care to scorching space when there's shares to be pumped? --- [1] https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-satellite-collision-alerts-on-the-rise https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-satellite-collision-al...

ClumsyPilot 5y ago
Spacex already had a staring contest with ESA, or whatever this was about, it does not instill me with confidence: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanocallaghan/2019/09/02/spacex-refused-to-move-a-starlink-satellite-at-risk-of-collision-with-a-european-satellite/?sh=1586d6b51f62 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanocallaghan/2019/09/02/s...
CamperBob2 5y ago
Yeah, right. "They've proven" for values of "They" equal to "Starlink competitors." The fact is, regulators are satisfied with Starlink's plans for both collision avoidance and end-of-life deorbit. There is always somebody with an axe to grind. Musk is not motivated to turn LEO into an orbiting junkyard. Of course, to your point, neither are the Russians, yet here we are...
aaronblohowiak 5y ago
Starlink is really low so atmos drag would take care of it pretty quick, no?
- Enginerrrd 5y ago
  Yes. Within just a couple years I believe.
- tsimionescu 5y ago
  The shot down satellite was also in LEO.
  - aaronblohowiak 5y ago
    Starlink is 40 miles below iss
mbreese 5y ago
The debris cloud we’re talking about has created literally log units higher number of objects, most of which are too small to be tracked. And none of these objects can maneuver to avoid collisions. Bringing Spacex into this is just disingenuous. The two are in no way comparable.
Jtsummers 5y ago
Being involved with 50% of close encounters makes sense when they have 50% of the satellites. And when they have 10x more satellites they'll have about 90% of all (currently projected) LEO satellites, so again being involved in about 90% of them will make sense at that point as well. Kind of a nonsensical argument, if anyone else were putting out as many or more satellites then they'd be involved in a similar proportion of incidents. The part that matters is how SpaceX responds and coordinates with others to prevent collisions. You can't look at the raw numbers to get that.
elihu 5y ago
Starlink satellites have known orbits. A "close encounter" is when two satellites pass within a kilometer of each other. The occurrence of these is highly predictable. Planes pass within a kilometer of each other all the time, but it isn't an emergency because we have people whose job it is to make sure they don't actually hit each other, even when flying in nearby airspace. Same with satellites.
belltaco 5y ago
>there's shares to be pumped Where can you buy Starlink shares?

ClumsyPilot 5y ago

Spacex already had a staring contest with ESA, or whatever this was about, it does not instill me with confidence: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanocallaghan/2019/09/02/spacex-refused-to-move-a-starlink-satellite-at-risk-of-collision-with-a-european-satellite/?sh=1586d6b51f62 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanocallaghan/2019/09/02/s...

CamperBob2 5y ago

Yeah, right. "They've proven" for values of "They" equal to "Starlink competitors." The fact is, regulators are satisfied with Starlink's plans for both collision avoidance and end-of-life deorbit. There is always somebody with an axe to grind. Musk is not motivated to turn LEO into an orbiting junkyard. Of course, to your point, neither are the Russians, yet here we are...

aaronblohowiak 5y ago

Starlink is really low so atmos drag would take care of it pretty quick, no?

Enginerrrd 5y ago
Yes. Within just a couple years I believe.
tsimionescu 5y ago
The shot down satellite was also in LEO.
- aaronblohowiak 5y ago
  Starlink is 40 miles below iss

mbreese 5y ago

The debris cloud we’re talking about has created literally log units higher number of objects, most of which are too small to be tracked. And none of these objects can maneuver to avoid collisions. Bringing Spacex into this is just disingenuous. The two are in no way comparable.

Jtsummers 5y ago

Being involved with 50% of close encounters makes sense when they have 50% of the satellites. And when they have 10x more satellites they'll have about 90% of all (currently projected) LEO satellites, so again being involved in about 90% of them will make sense at that point as well. Kind of a nonsensical argument, if anyone else were putting out as many or more satellites then they'd be involved in a similar proportion of incidents. The part that matters is how SpaceX responds and coordinates with others to prevent collisions. You can't look at the raw numbers to get that.

elihu 5y ago

Starlink satellites have known orbits. A "close encounter" is when two satellites pass within a kilometer of each other. The occurrence of these is highly predictable. Planes pass within a kilometer of each other all the time, but it isn't an emergency because we have people whose job it is to make sure they don't actually hit each other, even when flying in nearby airspace. Same with satellites.

belltaco 5y ago

>there's shares to be pumped Where can you buy Starlink shares?