4 ms·
They had a ton of time indeed, but they didn't cover this particular eventuality. It's literally in the same post. Perhaps give it a read? Since launch, we h
by huhtenberg 4y ago
They had a ton of time indeed, but they didn't cover this particular eventuality. It's literally in the same post. Perhaps give it a read?
Since launch, we have had four smaller measurable micrometeoroid
strikes that were consistent with expectations and this one more
recently that is larger than our degradation predictions assumed.
- Termitiono 4y agoThis still doesn't indicate anything. It doesn't say how much bigger. My point I'm trying to make: the original comment indicates to me that we need to worry. For me it conveys much more speculation than I think is reasonable right now. For example they were also not expecting to have such a great optical resolution.
- BobbyJo 4y ago> This still doesn't indicate anything. It does indicate something. It indicates that > they weren't expecting this to happen so soon after the launch The delta matters, but no matter the delta, the fact that it defied expectation stands.
- wiz21c 4y agoHow does one even collect information about the probability of being hit by something that big in space ? They counted hits on things (ships) that came back from space ?
- jaggederest 4y agoThey've launched flat plates made of aerogel to capture orbital debris. For example: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/stardust/home/index.html https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/stardust/home/index.html
- Termitiono 4y agoThe lagrange point itself has a probability how realistic it is that something can be cought in it / if it stays there. There are other points were stones collect like l4 and l5. Then we have Hubble (and over 100 others as a benchmark, a few ships/missions like to the moon and Mars. Herschel space observatory was also on l2. There is a wiki Artikel called 'list of objects at langrange points'