4 ms·

why don't somebody build a net and a parachute to pull it down with high velocity ?

DanBC 12y ago
Space debris is in orbit, which means it's travelling fast. Space debris travels at 7 km/s. That would destroy any net you put up. Space debris that isn't travelling that fast just falls out of orbit. http://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/faqs.html#7 http://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/faqs.html#7
richmarr 12y ago
Assuming I haven't misunderstood... the cost of launching 200,000+ nets into orbit would be high (in my opinion, maybe someone has a sneaky solution). Assuming you could get each net (including guidance and propellant) down to about 1kg (not sure how realistic that is), and you can launch them into orbit for $4000/kg, then that'd be an expenditure of $800+ million not including R&D, manufacture, salaries, etc. It'd also mean increasing the number of objects in orbit for while.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
maxerickson 12y ago
One of the pie in sky ideas that gets floated is a large aerogel object that can slow down/trap the particles without creating a bunch of new ones. It would be put in an orbit that crosses orbits with a lot of debris.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
nine_k 12y ago
What could work might be a purpose-built spacecraft with a low-power but efficient engine (e.g. ion drive). This spacecraft would align velocities, then touch and bind every piece of space debris along its orbit. Eventually it would snowball enough to just let smaller pieces of debris hit it and stick. After it has become too heavy to maneuver, or when the propellant is depleted, the spacecraft would go down and burn in the atmosphere. The problem is the way to properly bind the pieces of debris.
- chiph 12y ago
  Sort of an orbital Katamari Damacy.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  Sounds a bit like rain formation: nucleation and aggregation. But space is big, and the spacecraft is not attracting anything (too small for gravity to matter). Not sure even a big snowball is going to collect much debris. A solar sail perhaps? Cross-section has to be key.

DanBC 12y ago

Space debris is in orbit, which means it's travelling fast. Space debris travels at 7 km/s. That would destroy any net you put up. Space debris that isn't travelling that fast just falls out of orbit. http://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/faqs.html#7 http://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/faqs.html#7

richmarr 12y ago

Assuming I haven't misunderstood... the cost of launching 200,000+ nets into orbit would be high (in my opinion, maybe someone has a sneaky solution). Assuming you could get each net (including guidance and propellant) down to about 1kg (not sure how realistic that is), and you can launch them into orbit for $4000/kg, then that'd be an expenditure of $800+ million not including R&D, manufacture, salaries, etc. It'd also mean increasing the number of objects in orbit for while.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

maxerickson 12y ago

One of the pie in sky ideas that gets floated is a large aerogel object that can slow down/trap the particles without creating a bunch of new ones. It would be put in an orbit that crosses orbits with a lot of debris.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

nine_k 12y ago

What could work might be a purpose-built spacecraft with a low-power but efficient engine (e.g. ion drive). This spacecraft would align velocities, then touch and bind every piece of space debris along its orbit. Eventually it would snowball enough to just let smaller pieces of debris hit it and stick. After it has become too heavy to maneuver, or when the propellant is depleted, the spacecraft would go down and burn in the atmosphere. The problem is the way to properly bind the pieces of debris.

chiph 12y ago
Sort of an orbital Katamari Damacy.
JoeAltmaier 12y ago
Sounds a bit like rain formation: nucleation and aggregation. But space is big, and the spacecraft is not attracting anything (too small for gravity to matter). Not sure even a big snowball is going to collect much debris. A solar sail perhaps? Cross-section has to be key.