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

New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 162 posts

Re: New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

#131

Post by MichaelZuo »

PittleyDunkin wrote: post #127
mapt wrote: post #8

The current trajectory is that SpaceX proved the commercial and military viability of an LEO megaconstellation, repeatedly lowering their target altitudes and raising their satellite count because of debris and cell size concerns... And now the rest of the world is trying to catch up in a sort of arms race, and not taking any care about debris concerns. The most tempting orbits are the ones in upper LEO that permit t…

> We need viable treaties limiting development beyond 400 or 500km and we need them ten years ago. Basically every other interest on earth is going to see this as the west exploiting space then pulling the ladder up after them. It's the same reason why hoping developing countries will stop using coal is ridiculous. We need to foot the bill to clean up after ourselves or people will just ignore us and do what they see…

Yeah unless all the orbits under 500 km are also annulled and put up for negotiation too, most countries would never accept it.

And even then the negotiation process will take decades so that means no LEO satellites available for anyone for several decades.

Re: New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

#132

Post by lordgroff »

perihelions wrote: post #118
lupusreal wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Stopping China's (highly strategic, military) satellite constellations isn't a "small amount of diplomacy". It's an impossibility. Put 100k boost-phase interceptors into LEO. Permit them a fixed quota of launches per year, shoot down the rest. Pax Americana.

Then they'd retaliate in kind, and we'd get nowhere. It's certain they have that capability, or can develop it. We stand to lose a lot more from a space war, right now, than anyone else. We (US/west) hold the lion's share of space commerce and orbital launch capacity. "Earth orbit is free and open for everyone" is more than Star Trek idealism—it's a precedent we've set that benefits us, especially .

We've seen Russians shoot their own satellites, officially to ensure no large object re-entry (or some such nonsense, I don't remember), but I'm 10000% that it's a demonstration to the United States. If the Russians can do it, I'm sure China either already can or is very close to there. It's time to stop pretending that US can enforce rules by fiat without ramifications that scale from getting space assets blown up to a global war.

The world is already dangerously unstable and here we are discussing new ideas on how to make it more so.

Re: New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

#133

Post by MrBuddyCasino »

maxglute wrote: post #38
perihelions wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would any of the US' adversaries agree to that? We have SpaceX, and they do not; lowering the altitude of megaconstellations is asymmetrically far more costly for them then it is for us. Stopping China's (highly strategic, military) satellite constellations isn't a "small amount of diplomacy". It's an impossibility. (It's even their declared planning that deliberate Kessler cascades are on the table [0]—to try to…

I think OP is suggesting US concede to sharing 500km orbits that SpaceX has disproportionately squatted rights to, since current international law is first come first serve. Where concede is to rejigger international law to increase density of 500km so others wouldn't have to go higher, i.e. PRC mega constellations going ~800 because ~500 mostly taken. Or in ops suggestion, free for all. This is more costly for US si…

There is no such thing as international law. There are only voluntary agreements.

Re: New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

#135

Post by GoblinSlayer »

Maybe it's a feature. If you want to build a large spaceship on the orbit you have a problem how to launch all the needed material, but with a lot of garbage already up there, you can just recycle it on spot, everything is already launched.

Re: New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

#136

Post by dangerwill »

nradov wrote: post #78
dangerwill wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US civil war is not the only time the US has been politically unstable. The civil rights movement, the labor disputes of the 1970s, the economic shocks every decade or so from market crashes all have been moments of instability. What is January 6th if not a concrete example of recent political instability? As for foreign policy consistency, 7 administrations takes us back to Reagan... The entire movement to sell…

Stability doesn't mean statis. The USA has been remarkably resilient to those minor shocks you listed. It continues to be the most politically stable of all the countries that actually count for anything in international affairs.

If those are "minor" shocks then is it only outright war that counts as instability for you?

If so then what countries in Europe (sans the Balkans) or East Asia do you think are less politically stable than the US?

Re: New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

#137

Post by lupusreal »

ben_w wrote: post #123
lupusreal wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A large mass of Whipple shields. The "clearing a path" idea is inane, but we do know how to absorb hypervelocity debris impacts while generating a net negative amount of debris.

Whipple shields fragment, don't they? They slow stuff down enough to not be a hazard to the thing being shielded, but if the goal is mess-reduction I don't see how that will help? https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Whipple-shield-concept_f...

The force of the impact effectively vaporizes part of the shield and the debris. Eventually the shield will be structurally unstable swiss cheese, but that can be modeled and the shield deorbited before it starts to fall apart.

Re: New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

#138

Post by lupusreal »

poulpy123 wrote: post #117
lupusreal wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Stopping China's (highly strategic, military) satellite constellations isn't a "small amount of diplomacy". It's an impossibility. Put 100k boost-phase interceptors into LEO. Permit them a fixed quota of launches per year, shoot down the rest. Pax Americana.

you mean total nuclear war

Once a boost-phase interception constellation is demonstrated, nuclear war would be infeasible. They could try it with cruise missiles but that would only ensure their own destruction. They could try launching their own BMD constellation but that can be denied by the first.

Re: New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

#139

Post by lxgr »

m4rtink wrote: post #111
lxgr wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd consider it much less likely than e.g. nuclear or maybe chemical/biological warfare. Kessler syndrome (if even achievable with current technology) would be a major bummer for science and the global economy for a couple of decades (no more Starlink, but we still have good old geostationary satellites, so no ships and airplanes would get disconnected as a result), or at worst centuries, but would otherwise not form…

I think it would be actually the other way around - Starlink orbits aee low enough to be self cleaning & Starlink satellites can be (and are) rapidly replenished. So even if something from up above hits anfew, the debris would deorbit soon & new ones could be launched. With GEO sats, unless you go for direct GEO insertion, it might still have issues reaching the final orbit. And even at GEO, there could be a debris c…

On the other hand, there is just so much less stuff up there, as reaching that orbit is much more expensive in terms of energy expenditure, and it's all moving in pretty much the same direction and in the same orbital plane.

So unless somebody maliciously launches e.g. a bunch of ball bearings in the same orbital plane but opposite direction, the chances of "wrecking GEO" seem much lower (although the consequences would, as you say, probably be much more severe and long-term).

Re: New Calculation Finds we are close to the Kessler Syndrome [video]

#140

Post by lxgr »

PittleyDunkin wrote: post #130
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say intentionally destroying space assets etc should be considered an act of war (compare attacking another nation's ship in international waters), NK wouldn't have a chance and they could be put into space lockdown where any launches are intercepted.

Good luck dragging people into war over space trash that doesn't even benefit most peoples' lives in any material sense.

Are you sure that you have never looked at a weather forecast (or received a severe weather warning), crossed an ocean in an airplane, used GPS (or another satellite-based navigation system, or eaten food farmed using precision automated equipment that does), which are just the first things coming to mind that would be much harder without satellites?
Post reply on HN