Sounds like an expensive situation.
Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
411–420 of 508 posts
Re: Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
#412Earlier quoted context omitted.
How modified would a Tesla Cybertruck need to be to run on the moon?
If I had to guess, probably quite a bit. I doubt the battery cells or the electronics would hold up under hard vacuum. I recall a story posted here that if you put an iPhone in helium it will break the MEMS components inside of it and it will fail to boot, and that's still at 1 atmosphere.
The battery is already sealed, and 1 atmosphere isn't a lot of pressure to contain. It might even be able to be pressurized to quite a bit less. Regarding the electronics, engineering-wise that's a solved problem. And it would only need the drivetrain and charging electronics.
I suppose that a wider track would be useful in 1/3 G, but that is a mod that off-roaders have been doing at home for decades. Ditto ride height and wheel size.
I would not be surprised to see a Cybertruck offloading from a Starship someday, maybe even on a private mission after Artemis finishes.
Re: Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
#413Seems like a great way to test the resilience of Starlink launches during a predicted geomagnetic storm. And great PR considering how much negative press they’ve been getting over space junk. https://www.google.com/search?q=starlink+space+junk&rlz=1CDG...
The negative press is rather interesting and I'm always wondering where it's coming from. Why generate so much negative press.
People don't like the prospect of issues in certain orbits for the benefit of a billionaire or research satellites getting destroyed or worse if stuff does ever go wrong. If Europes ESA and china's CNSA both complain about having to do manoeuvrers it's easy to see who most will side with.
Re: Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
#414Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a big collection of “why don’t they just” comments from HN. It’s pretty amusing to look at them in aggregate.
Would you mind sharing it?
Maybe someday. I wouldn’t want to share it without finding time to write a few paragraphs. This community is really great and I don’t want to criticize without context. HN also over-represents one engineering discipline and one region.
I don’t know how to summarize my feelings, but I work in aerospace, primarily in hardware, in Asia, often as a manager. I see a lot of comments that simplify and often criticize those topics based on the simplification. I’ve also said “just do this” to software engineers so I want to emphasize that this is not a dig at certain types of engineers or people but maybe most of us can do better at recognizing where our expertise starts and stops.
Re: Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
#415It must be noted that the satellites were not directly damaged by the geomagnetic storm. The storm warmed the atmosphere which caused it to expand, leading to additional drag that prohibited the satellites from leaving their low "safe mode" orbit. Shortened excerpt: "These storms cause the atmosphere to warm and atmospheric density at our low deployment altitudes to increase.... speed and severity of the storm caused…
The storm warmed the atmosphere which caused it to expand, leading to additional drag
Was this an expected condition, or a new discovery?
I only have a layman's understanding of space, but like the idea that we (as a species) just learned something new.
Re: Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
#416Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Try not to assume the worst, especially when it's pretty silly. I'm just asking questions -- I would be genuinely curious if SpaceX has a system for determining and evaluating risk when it comes to a situation like this. It does seem absurd that they wouldn't review the active warnings prior to launches. What is indisputable here is that they've announced the loss of 40 satellites during an active warning. I think…
"So…we have the Space Weather Prediction Center [0] and raw data from NOAA for this exact purpose. Does SpaceX not review the data / warnings before launch?" is not just asking questions; it's full-on passive-aggressive. Being pseudo-anonymous and safely behind a screen depersonalizes the experience enough that we get tempted to take swipes for some reason (I do too), and it diminishes the experience on places like H…
Fine, I'll be direct. Why does it appear that SpaceX failed at risk management in the presence of readily available data to suggest delaying launch?
Re: Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
#417> "…meaning no orbital debris is created and no satellite parts hit the ground."
How is this possible? Maybe I'm missing something, but the satellite parts have to go somewhere
Re: Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
#418> "…meaning no orbital debris is created and no satellite parts hit the ground." How is this possible? Maybe I'm missing something, but the satellite parts have to go somewhere
Burned up on entry, rendered down to heat, gas, and ash. Debris would usually be considered chunks of the original, so ash doesn't count.
In this context it also means none of that is left in orbit either, which may be the more significant advantage of their procedures.
Re: Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
#419> "…meaning no orbital debris is created and no satellite parts hit the ground." How is this possible? Maybe I'm missing something, but the satellite parts have to go somewhere
They burn up.
Re: Starlink lost 40 satellites to a geomagnetic storm
#420It must be noted that the satellites were not directly damaged by the geomagnetic storm. The storm warmed the atmosphere which caused it to expand, leading to additional drag that prohibited the satellites from leaving their low "safe mode" orbit. Shortened excerpt: "These storms cause the atmosphere to warm and atmospheric density at our low deployment altitudes to increase.... speed and severity of the storm caused…
The storm warmed the atmosphere which caused it to expand, leading to additional drag Was this an expected condition, or a new discovery? I only have a layman's understanding of space, but like the idea that we (as a species) just learned something new.
... We have been launching satellites for a long, long time. The process is very well understood, scientifically. Also, your prior should not be that just because you personally haven't heard of something, it must be a new discovery. In fact, in this case it appears to be literally the second bullet point on the first page I could find talking about the risks of geomagnetic storms: https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-are-hazards-magnetic-storms