3 ms·
Although it could become risky enough that the cost mitigation becomes untenable. For example, I wouldn't want to live in a neighborhood so dangerous that I h
by MikeNotThePope 1y ago
Although it could become risky enough that the cost mitigation becomes untenable. For example, I wouldn't want to live in a neighborhood so dangerous that I have to pay to cover my house in thick armor plating just to avoid being collateral damage of the violence shenanigans outside my front door.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago> it could become risky enough that the cost mitigation becomes untenable What cost mitigation are you referring to? > thick armor plating It makes about as much sense to armor a satellite as it does a plane. (Much less, actually, given the fuel costs are higher, energies in orbit are higher and densities orders of magnitude lower--to approximate the global density of airplanes in LEO, we'd need something like 4mm satellites up there. To approximate the density of controlled airspaces in LEO, we need about 10x that.) > violence shenanigans outside my front door Where the closest object to your front door is 10+ miles away.
- tshaddox 1y agoI’m not sure you’re describing a different scenario, since I don’t think anyone was ever only concerned about a future where there’s a 100% chance of a launch being prevented by debris.