6 ms·

They could easily saturate the whole LEO where starlink operates with schrapnel - and any damaged sat would add more schrapnel, as described by the "Kessler syn

by aredox 4y ago

They could easily saturate the whole LEO where starlink operates with schrapnel - and any damaged sat would add more schrapnel, as described by the "Kessler syndrome".

baq 4y ago
There's nothing easy about what you propose. It requires launch capability similar to what SpaceX has, i.e. state of the art.
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  Given that they have a working space station, I'm certain China has enough launch capability to make the Starlink orbit hell with several well-placed rockets undergoing very dirty disassembly in orbit. (In fact, among the things that makes that scenario less likely is the fact they have a space station and would like to keep visiting it without worrying about passing through a Kessler cloud).
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    A space station doesn't mean you have a lot of launch capability. Its and its not clear how you standard rockets can easily be used as anti-sat weapons, and if that makes finical sense.
  - soperj 4y ago
    US had a working space station for over a decade without the ability to put people onto that space station.
    - shadowgovt 4y ago
      This is true, but seems irrelevant because China is self-crewing its station.
  - ncallaway 4y ago
    A Kessler cloud would not persist in orbit at the altitude of Starlink satellites for very long. And building and maintaining a Kessler cloud at that altitude seems like it would be… not effective with just a handful of rockets due to the significant atmospheric drag. Kessler syndrome is a real concern, but only at higher altitudes where atmospheric drag is negligible.
  - mlindner 4y ago
    > Given that they have a working space station, I'm certain China has enough launch capability to make the Starlink orbit hell with several well-placed rockets undergoing very dirty disassembly in orbit. Yes and their "working space station" is also below that orbit. So they'd need to blow up their own station as well. Also the international space station as well.
audunw 4y ago
That would be quite dumb. Whatever you put in that orbit will decay within a few years. Given the current situation, USA/SpaceX is in a far better position to quickly repopulate LEO with satellites when the debris has fallen down. In that case, they may send up satellites armed with weapons that can shoot down anything being launched into orbit to create debris again. I don't think entering into that kind of conflict with USA is a winning proposition for China unless they have their own Falcon 9 or Starship-like rocket.
- outworlder 4y ago
  > In that case, they may send up satellites armed with weapons that can shoot down anything being launched into orbit to create debris again. What happened to the outer space treaty?
  - modeless 4y ago
    Ripped up as soon as you started intentionally trying to create Kessler syndrome...
  - gojomo 4y ago
    In some hypothetical hot conflict where a major belligerent nation had already started taking down satellites and/or polluting orbits, the treaty will have already become a 'dead letter'.
  - Rebelgecko 4y ago
    As long as they're not using nukes I don't think compliance with the OST would be an issue
  - TMWNN 4y ago
    Let me guess: You're one of those people who said that the US Space Force "violated the treaty" because it "weaponizes space", right? The treaty bans weapons of mass destruction in space. It does not ban military activity in space at all.
- sangnoir 4y ago
modeless 4y ago
Kessler syndrome is not "easy" to create at 550km. The orbits decay way too fast. Whole satellites decay in 5 years or less; smaller debris decays faster due to higher surface area to mass ratio. And the orbit doesn't have to decay all the way to 0 for the debris to stop being a threat to Starlink; a few km is all it would take. I haven't seen a lot of calculations about this but my belief is that even intentionally creating Kessler syndrome at 550 km would be infeasible, and it certainly won't happen by accident.
- tomatotomato37 4y ago
  The point really isn't to completely shut down that orbit, just deny it for however long you strategically need. Throwing up a huge flak cloud using magnetized cheap metal tinsel on an old ICBM isn't only easy, but also has actually been done before, albeit for different reasons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford
  - modeless 4y ago
    You won't be able to cause Kessler syndrome promptly. It takes a while for the collision debris to build up, and it takes a while for individual satellites to get hit. Space is big and even huge debris clouds will take a long time to hit something. It's not going to help your invasion next month or anything like that. Very impractical as a weapon of war, even if it was feasible which it isn't.
    - simondotau 4y ago
      Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. Any given orbital plane is larger than the entire surface of Earth, including the oceans. Combine that with the fact that explosions and collisions introduce randomness to the orbital plane of each piece of debris, and you’ve got a lot of hurdles to overcome in order to get to some short term low earth orbit Kessler.
- godelski 4y ago
  That just makes it more likely. If you think war is going to last awhile, or you have a severe disadvantage, you shut down access to space for a few years. The cost of such an attack is lower BECAUSE it resolves itself rather quickly. Though the issue is that it is substantially harder to create the Kessler Syndrome than people claim.

by aredox 4y ago

They could easily saturate the whole LEO where starlink operates with schrapnel - and any damaged sat would add more schrapnel, as described by the "Kessler syndrome".

baq 4y ago

There's nothing easy about what you propose. It requires launch capability similar to what SpaceX has, i.e. state of the art.

shadowgovt 4y ago
Given that they have a working space station, I'm certain China has enough launch capability to make the Starlink orbit hell with several well-placed rockets undergoing very dirty disassembly in orbit. (In fact, among the things that makes that scenario less likely is the fact they have a space station and would like to keep visiting it without worrying about passing through a Kessler cloud).
- panick21_ 4y ago
  A space station doesn't mean you have a lot of launch capability. Its and its not clear how you standard rockets can easily be used as anti-sat weapons, and if that makes finical sense.
- soperj 4y ago
  US had a working space station for over a decade without the ability to put people onto that space station.
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    This is true, but seems irrelevant because China is self-crewing its station.
- ncallaway 4y ago
  A Kessler cloud would not persist in orbit at the altitude of Starlink satellites for very long. And building and maintaining a Kessler cloud at that altitude seems like it would be… not effective with just a handful of rockets due to the significant atmospheric drag. Kessler syndrome is a real concern, but only at higher altitudes where atmospheric drag is negligible.
- mlindner 4y ago
  > Given that they have a working space station, I'm certain China has enough launch capability to make the Starlink orbit hell with several well-placed rockets undergoing very dirty disassembly in orbit. Yes and their "working space station" is also below that orbit. So they'd need to blow up their own station as well. Also the international space station as well.

audunw 4y ago

That would be quite dumb. Whatever you put in that orbit will decay within a few years. Given the current situation, USA/SpaceX is in a far better position to quickly repopulate LEO with satellites when the debris has fallen down. In that case, they may send up satellites armed with weapons that can shoot down anything being launched into orbit to create debris again. I don't think entering into that kind of conflict with USA is a winning proposition for China unless they have their own Falcon 9 or Starship-like rocket.

outworlder 4y ago
> In that case, they may send up satellites armed with weapons that can shoot down anything being launched into orbit to create debris again. What happened to the outer space treaty?
- modeless 4y ago
  Ripped up as soon as you started intentionally trying to create Kessler syndrome...
- gojomo 4y ago
  In some hypothetical hot conflict where a major belligerent nation had already started taking down satellites and/or polluting orbits, the treaty will have already become a 'dead letter'.
- Rebelgecko 4y ago
  As long as they're not using nukes I don't think compliance with the OST would be an issue
- TMWNN 4y ago
  Let me guess: You're one of those people who said that the US Space Force "violated the treaty" because it "weaponizes space", right? The treaty bans weapons of mass destruction in space. It does not ban military activity in space at all.
sangnoir 4y ago

modeless 4y ago

Kessler syndrome is not "easy" to create at 550km. The orbits decay way too fast. Whole satellites decay in 5 years or less; smaller debris decays faster due to higher surface area to mass ratio. And the orbit doesn't have to decay all the way to 0 for the debris to stop being a threat to Starlink; a few km is all it would take. I haven't seen a lot of calculations about this but my belief is that even intentionally creating Kessler syndrome at 550 km would be infeasible, and it certainly won't happen by accident.

tomatotomato37 4y ago
The point really isn't to completely shut down that orbit, just deny it for however long you strategically need. Throwing up a huge flak cloud using magnetized cheap metal tinsel on an old ICBM isn't only easy, but also has actually been done before, albeit for different reasons https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford
- modeless 4y ago
  You won't be able to cause Kessler syndrome promptly. It takes a while for the collision debris to build up, and it takes a while for individual satellites to get hit. Space is big and even huge debris clouds will take a long time to hit something. It's not going to help your invasion next month or anything like that. Very impractical as a weapon of war, even if it was feasible which it isn't.
  - simondotau 4y ago
    Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. Any given orbital plane is larger than the entire surface of Earth, including the oceans. Combine that with the fact that explosions and collisions introduce randomness to the orbital plane of each piece of debris, and you’ve got a lot of hurdles to overcome in order to get to some short term low earth orbit Kessler.
godelski 4y ago
That just makes it more likely. If you think war is going to last awhile, or you have a severe disadvantage, you shut down access to space for a few years. The cost of such an attack is lower BECAUSE it resolves itself rather quickly. Though the issue is that it is substantially harder to create the Kessler Syndrome than people claim.