3 ms·

"With the commercial space industry booming, the number of satellites in Earth's orbit is forecast to rise sharply. This bonanza of new satellites will eventual

"With the commercial space industry booming, the number of satellites in Earth's orbit is forecast to rise sharply. This bonanza of new satellites will eventually wear out and turn the space around Earth into a giant junkyard of debris..." All modern commercial satellites are required to have a safe deorbit plan. The FCC regulates that LEO satellites must deorbit within 5 years of mission completion. Disclaimer: I work for a commercial satellite operator. Our satellites deorbit and burn up without intervention at the end of their lifecycle.

I_Am_Nous 3y ago
>Our satellites deorbit and burn up without intervention at the end of their lifecycle. I'm curious how this works. Is there a certain amount of propellant reserved for the deorbit plan?
- dharmab 3y ago
  I apologize, I couldn't find somewhere that specific information is publicly documented and I need to stay on the legal side of ITAR. I think you can find that information from public sources about other CubeSats, though.
  - I_Am_Nous 3y ago
    I understand, and no worries! After I posted I thought about how that might be sensitive information, have a nice night :)
- techdragon 3y ago
  Typically yes... Alternative mechanisms include using solar panels to increase drag, and some companies are experimenting with devices that interact with the earths magnetic field to produce electromagnetic drag… But reserving fuel for “decommissioning operations” is standard practice for satellite operators and the space industry in general.
  - westurner 3y ago
    Are there any unboosted or boosted orbital trajectories that deorbit by "ejection" rather than atmospheric friction and pollution? Is the minimum perturbation necessary to "eject from earth orbit" lower in an Earth-Moon Lunar cycler orbit? (And, If decommissioned, why shouldn't the ISS be placed into a Lunar Cycler Earth-Moon orbit to test systems failure, lunar cycler orbits, and extra- Van-Allen radiation's impact on real systems failure?) Couldn't you build those out of recyclable proton batteries and heat-shielded bioplastic? "Falling metal space junk is changing Earth's upper atmosphere in ways we don't fully understand" (2023) and also solar microwave power beaming and fluids https://www.livescience.com/space/space-exploration/falling-metal-space-junk-is-changing-earths-upper-atmosphere-in-ways-we-dont-fully-understand https://www.livescience.com/space/space-exploration/falling-... "Metals from spacecraft reentry in stratospheric aerosol particles" (2023) https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2313374120 https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2313374120
    - techdragon 3y ago
      There sort of are some ejection disposals, but they are rarely used due to how specific the orbital parameters need to be in order for that to be the “cheaper” option. You usually find it’s not exactly the sort of disposals your expecting though. Several space probes have used launch trajectories where their final booster stage will be placed into a heliocentric orbit, with the general trajectory placing it on an uncontrolled gravity assist and then the space probe will use a very small amount of fuel to precisely control the gravity assist it receives in order to get where it needs to be going… and the booster stage will have its already heliocentric orbit further changed by the gravity assist. It’s all about the deltaV … it takes way less to deorbit LEO and even some of the MEO satellites than to perform a lunar orbit raising, and GEO would be too costly to do either when which is why the GEO graveyard orbit belt is quite well defined… as for boosting the ISS up towards the moon to perform a Salyut 7 style long duration equipment survival experiment…. That’s a lot of fuel, and we already have that experience since we’ve been monitoring the entire ISS since we launched it…
      - westurner 3y ago

I_Am_Nous 3y ago

>Our satellites deorbit and burn up without intervention at the end of their lifecycle. I'm curious how this works. Is there a certain amount of propellant reserved for the deorbit plan?

dharmab 3y ago
I apologize, I couldn't find somewhere that specific information is publicly documented and I need to stay on the legal side of ITAR. I think you can find that information from public sources about other CubeSats, though.
- I_Am_Nous 3y ago
  I understand, and no worries! After I posted I thought about how that might be sensitive information, have a nice night :)
techdragon 3y ago
Typically yes... Alternative mechanisms include using solar panels to increase drag, and some companies are experimenting with devices that interact with the earths magnetic field to produce electromagnetic drag… But reserving fuel for “decommissioning operations” is standard practice for satellite operators and the space industry in general.
- westurner 3y ago
  Are there any unboosted or boosted orbital trajectories that deorbit by "ejection" rather than atmospheric friction and pollution? Is the minimum perturbation necessary to "eject from earth orbit" lower in an Earth-Moon Lunar cycler orbit? (And, If decommissioned, why shouldn't the ISS be placed into a Lunar Cycler Earth-Moon orbit to test systems failure, lunar cycler orbits, and extra- Van-Allen radiation's impact on real systems failure?) Couldn't you build those out of recyclable proton batteries and heat-shielded bioplastic? "Falling metal space junk is changing Earth's upper atmosphere in ways we don't fully understand" (2023) and also solar microwave power beaming and fluids https://www.livescience.com/space/space-exploration/falling-metal-space-junk-is-changing-earths-upper-atmosphere-in-ways-we-dont-fully-understand https://www.livescience.com/space/space-exploration/falling-... "Metals from spacecraft reentry in stratospheric aerosol particles" (2023) https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2313374120 https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2313374120
  - techdragon 3y ago
    There sort of are some ejection disposals, but they are rarely used due to how specific the orbital parameters need to be in order for that to be the “cheaper” option. You usually find it’s not exactly the sort of disposals your expecting though. Several space probes have used launch trajectories where their final booster stage will be placed into a heliocentric orbit, with the general trajectory placing it on an uncontrolled gravity assist and then the space probe will use a very small amount of fuel to precisely control the gravity assist it receives in order to get where it needs to be going… and the booster stage will have its already heliocentric orbit further changed by the gravity assist. It’s all about the deltaV … it takes way less to deorbit LEO and even some of the MEO satellites than to perform a lunar orbit raising, and GEO would be too costly to do either when which is why the GEO graveyard orbit belt is quite well defined… as for boosting the ISS up towards the moon to perform a Salyut 7 style long duration equipment survival experiment…. That’s a lot of fuel, and we already have that experience since we’ve been monitoring the entire ISS since we launched it…
    - westurner 3y ago