Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

payloadspace.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 119 posts

Re: FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

#21

Post by bryanlarsen »

elliekelly wrote: post #16
rzimmerman wrote: post #12

I think this is generally a good thing to do, with some caveats that I hope the FCC considers. For most satellites below ~450km, this is really a non-issue. Atmospheric drag will generally be sufficient to deorbit the satellite in a few years. For big Earth-observing constellations, Starlink and friends, and many small missions, this doesn't change anything. Debris don't really accumulate dangerously in this zone and…

> Debris don't really accumulate dangerously in this zone and collision avoidance is a well-studied problem with a lot of people doing great work. I think this line of thinking is dangerously incorrect. Sure it’s not a problem right now but we’re poised to have a lot more stuff in orbit than we’ve ever had before. Plastic waste didn’t initially “accumulate dangerously” either but once it became more widely used (and…

Debris does not accumulate in LEO, it reenters naturally. This isn't like plastic waste, it's more like organic waste that naturally decays. Sometimes the law says you have to clean up organic waste, but sometimes it's better to let it rot on its own.

Re: FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

#22

Post by MichaelCollins »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #10
MichaelCollins wrote: post #2

> The rule shortens the time required for satellite operators to deorbit LEO satellites to no more than 5 years after completing their mission, from 25 years. De-orbiting faster means reserving more propellant for the final de-orbit burn. Since the lifespan of satellites is already generally determined by how much propellant they have, this new rule effectively reduces the lifespan of any satellite high enough to req…

How does this FFC rule work in an international market? I assume it applies for US companies with US based launches. Does it apply to US satellite companies with ex-US launches? Are US companies free to purchase service/bandwidth from ex-US launched satellites which are not compliant?

US companies launching satellites with foreign launch providers still need to get a license from the FCC if their satellite uses radio communications.

Re: FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

#23

Post by bryanlarsen »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #22
s1artibartfast wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this FFC rule work in an international market? I assume it applies for US companies with US based launches. Does it apply to US satellite companies with ex-US launches? Are US companies free to purchase service/bandwidth from ex-US launched satellites which are not compliant?

US companies launching satellites with foreign launch providers still need to get a license from the FCC if their satellite uses radio communications.

How about foreign satellites on foreign launch systems that wish to communicate with ground stations in the US? I assume they also need an FCC license.

Re: FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

#25

Post by ortusdux »

rzimmerman wrote: post #12

I think this is generally a good thing to do, with some caveats that I hope the FCC considers. For most satellites below ~450km, this is really a non-issue. Atmospheric drag will generally be sufficient to deorbit the satellite in a few years. For big Earth-observing constellations, Starlink and friends, and many small missions, this doesn't change anything. Debris don't really accumulate dangerously in this zone and…

Several companies have been developing deorbit add-on modules, and I hope this requirement spurs on this growing industry. I would love it if it became the norm that satellites have a passive failsafe deorbit system that activates at after a set amount of time or if ground communications fail for a set duration.

https://www.nasa.gov/smallsat-institute/sst-soa/deorbit-syst...

Re: FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

#26

Post by mikeyouse »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #21
elliekelly wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Debris don't really accumulate dangerously in this zone and collision avoidance is a well-studied problem with a lot of people doing great work. I think this line of thinking is dangerously incorrect. Sure it’s not a problem right now but we’re poised to have a lot more stuff in orbit than we’ve ever had before. Plastic waste didn’t initially “accumulate dangerously” either but once it became more widely used (and…

Debris does not accumulate in LEO, it reenters naturally. This isn't like plastic waste, it's more like organic waste that naturally decays. Sometimes the law says you have to clean up organic waste, but sometimes it's better to let it rot on its own.

The timeframe varies widely based on the shape of the object and the altitude. There are something like 5 orders of magnitude pressure difference between an object at 100km and one at 500km which is the difference between deorbiting in days vs years.

Re: FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

#27

Post by rzimmerman »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #24

When exactly did the FCC's jurisdiction extend to the heavens? There should be a lot more concern than there currently is over an agency granting itself powers over private property in space.

FCC approval is required to communicate with a (US-based) satellite in space, so effectively they can apply rules like this one. It's less of a power grab/nefarious plot and more a utilitarian kind of thing - the FCC has historically been the only agency that has authority to exert this pressure, so the work falls on them. It's admittedly odd that it's not the FAA or Space Force, but that's how it is.

Re: FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

#28

Post by frostburg »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #24

When exactly did the FCC's jurisdiction extend to the heavens? There should be a lot more concern than there currently is over an agency granting itself powers over private property in space.

They're friends with other people with guns and rockets.

Re: FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

#29

Post by enraged_camel »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #24

When exactly did the FCC's jurisdiction extend to the heavens? There should be a lot more concern than there currently is over an agency granting itself powers over private property in space.

Well, various government agencies have jurisdiction over, say, private cars that drive on public roads, so why couldn't you apply similar logic to the FCC with regards to satellite regulation?

Re: FCC Approves 5 Year Satellite Deorbiting Rule

#30

Post by MichaelCollins »

elliekelly wrote: post #16
rzimmerman wrote: post #12

I think this is generally a good thing to do, with some caveats that I hope the FCC considers. For most satellites below ~450km, this is really a non-issue. Atmospheric drag will generally be sufficient to deorbit the satellite in a few years. For big Earth-observing constellations, Starlink and friends, and many small missions, this doesn't change anything. Debris don't really accumulate dangerously in this zone and…

> Debris don't really accumulate dangerously in this zone and collision avoidance is a well-studied problem with a lot of people doing great work. I think this line of thinking is dangerously incorrect. Sure it’s not a problem right now but we’re poised to have a lot more stuff in orbit than we’ve ever had before. Plastic waste didn’t initially “accumulate dangerously” either but once it became more widely used (and…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQT5aMa_7iI

"Gabbard Diagram for Low Earth Orbit 1959-2021"

See how the stuff in the lower left corner speeds up towards the lower left corner? That's low flying debris falling out of space.

Post reply on HN