4 ms·
Very interesting development, mainly that it posed no threat of causing a cascade of space debris since it's in such a low orbit. That feels like an important a
by pixelpoet 5y ago
Very interesting development, mainly that it posed no threat of causing a cascade of space debris since it's in such a low orbit. That feels like an important aspect for considering the acceptability of so many objects from one company/entity in orbit, especially considering the existing cost to astronomy.
So we've heard from SpaceX about their LEO sats, but what about other ones further out?
- bee_rider 5y agoI believe the faster orbital decay was part of the reason for putting them so low (on top of the obvious latency advantages).
- mlindner 5y agoThe thing that's not being well conveyed to people here is the storm didn't cause any satellite failure. The storm caused an expansion of the atmosphere which prevented re-orientation and orbit raising. The satellites are still functioning fine.