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

Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

spaceweather.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 55 posts

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#11

Post by jacquesm »

madaxe_again wrote: post #8
user32489318 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but at scale of 10k, chances of collision due to malfunction are not 0.

And so what if they collide? This isn’t Kessler syndrome territory, it’s low enough orbit that debris would re-enter and burn up rapidly. You’d lose the colliding satellites, and that’s likely all. Not that there has been a single starlink collision, but y’know.

> Not that there has been a single starlink collision

How sure are you that that would be made public?

Would it be always observed and caught outside of SpaceX?

If not, is that proof that if there such collisions they don't matter?

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#12

Post by jacquesm »

mikkupikku wrote: post #7
user32489318 wrote: post #3

What I found so fascinating about starling is how easy it was for a single country, even a single company in this case, to pollute near-earth space. I understand the mechanics of LEO, and the de-orbit mechanics put in place. But the world-wide impact, unknown side-effects on the upper layers of atmosphere on the re-entry of literally thousands of satellites within fairly short period of time?

On a bad year, there might be a few hundred tons of Starlink satellites reentering the atmosphere. In the same year, there will be something like 5000 tons of meteors reentrying, and if you include space dust that radars don't see, you're looking at a few times more than that. This appeal to scary ignorance to poop on a technology is a cynical reflex. Instead of just saying that a bare number with no context scares y…

You're low by a factor of three.

You probably could make the same point in a better way as well.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#13

Post by madaxe_again »

jacquesm wrote: post #11
madaxe_again wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And so what if they collide? This isn’t Kessler syndrome territory, it’s low enough orbit that debris would re-enter and burn up rapidly. You’d lose the colliding satellites, and that’s likely all. Not that there has been a single starlink collision, but y’know.

> Not that there has been a single starlink collision How sure are you that that would be made public? Would it be always observed and caught outside of SpaceX? If not, is that proof that if there such collisions they don't matter?

There are a great many eyes on the sky, and you can’t hide stuff up there - even every secret military satellite is known and tracked - so something as substantial as a collision would likely be known about before it even happens, as ephemera don’t change without an input.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#14

Post by severino »

user32489318 wrote: post #3

What I found so fascinating about starling is how easy it was for a single country, even a single company in this case, to pollute near-earth space. I understand the mechanics of LEO, and the de-orbit mechanics put in place. But the world-wide impact, unknown side-effects on the upper layers of atmosphere on the re-entry of literally thousands of satellites within fairly short period of time?

True. And what will happen when another company wants their 10k satellites on orbit too? And companies from another countries, as well.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#15

Post by Pay08 »

user32489318 wrote: post #5
aledevv wrote: post #2

10,000 Starlink satellites orbiting the Earth?? I didn't know there were so many, really so many. Their presence has already radically transformed the orbital environment. There are so many that in 2025 alone they performed around 300,000 collision avoidance maneuvers. In short: on the one hand, they're convenient for us because of their fantastic internet connection, but on the other, they're generating truly unprec…

Imagine a threat actor blowing up one or two of them. Or malfunction leading to collision with a launcher. Or any satellite malfunction and failure to de-orbit in time. Remember MAD, mutual assured distraction? Well we created another one for access to space

No, we wouldn't.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#16

Post by wongarsu »

user32489318 wrote: post #3

What I found so fascinating about starling is how easy it was for a single country, even a single company in this case, to pollute near-earth space. I understand the mechanics of LEO, and the de-orbit mechanics put in place. But the world-wide impact, unknown side-effects on the upper layers of atmosphere on the re-entry of literally thousands of satellites within fairly short period of time?

It wasn't easy at all. Nobody except SpaceX could have done it at the time. This is the result of SpaceX being able to launch much cheaper than anyone before them, and being able to use these high-cadence launches to both implement and test incremental improvements in their rockets and streamline their reuse of preflown boosters.

SpaceX was the only conceivable launch provider for this, and if it had been an external customer that cares too much about the risk of these launches the incremental improvements that made this cost-effective wouldn't have been possible. Realistically this was only viable for SpaceX doing it as part of R&D for their own rockets. And even then this puts severe financial strain on them because their original business plan was built around having Starship available years ago for even cheaper deployment of bigger satellites

Of course now that it has been done and technology has advanced by ~7 years it is much easier for new mega constellations. But at the time SpaceX started doing it the idea was rightfully called insane

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#17

Post by karlgkk »

jacquesm wrote: post #11
madaxe_again wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And so what if they collide? This isn’t Kessler syndrome territory, it’s low enough orbit that debris would re-enter and burn up rapidly. You’d lose the colliding satellites, and that’s likely all. Not that there has been a single starlink collision, but y’know.

> Not that there has been a single starlink collision How sure are you that that would be made public? Would it be always observed and caught outside of SpaceX? If not, is that proof that if there such collisions they don't matter?

> How sure are you that that would be made public?

Extremely sure. There are both numerous private, academic, and governmental agencies that are constantly searching for both collision paths, and collision debris.

The debris cloud alone would generate an extremely visible signature.

> Would it be always observed and caught outside of SpaceX?

Yes.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#18

Post by jacquesm »

madaxe_again wrote: post #13
jacquesm wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not that there has been a single starlink collision How sure are you that that would be made public? Would it be always observed and caught outside of SpaceX? If not, is that proof that if there such collisions they don't matter?

There are a great many eyes on the sky, and you can’t hide stuff up there - even every secret military satellite is known and tracked - so something as substantial as a collision would likely be known about before it even happens , as ephemera don’t change without an input.

Thank you for the answer. I'm aware of the degree of coverage over land but I was wondering about the ocean side of things as well.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#19

Post by jacquesm »

karlgkk wrote: post #17
jacquesm wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not that there has been a single starlink collision How sure are you that that would be made public? Would it be always observed and caught outside of SpaceX? If not, is that proof that if there such collisions they don't matter?

> How sure are you that that would be made public? Extremely sure. There are both numerous private, academic, and governmental agencies that are constantly searching for both collision paths, and collision debris. The debris cloud alone would generate an extremely visible signature. > Would it be always observed and caught outside of SpaceX? Yes.

Thank you for the answer.

Re: Animation 10k Starlink Satellites

#20

Post by wongarsu »

user32489318 wrote: post #5
aledevv wrote: post #2

10,000 Starlink satellites orbiting the Earth?? I didn't know there were so many, really so many. Their presence has already radically transformed the orbital environment. There are so many that in 2025 alone they performed around 300,000 collision avoidance maneuvers. In short: on the one hand, they're convenient for us because of their fantastic internet connection, but on the other, they're generating truly unprec…

Imagine a threat actor blowing up one or two of them. Or malfunction leading to collision with a launcher. Or any satellite malfunction and failure to de-orbit in time. Remember MAD, mutual assured distraction? Well we created another one for access to space

> Or any satellite malfunction and failure to de-orbit in time

Last year they had one "dead as a doornail" Starlink satellite in space. [1] It's v1.5, so deployed sometime between 2021 and 2023. It should be naturally deorbited from atmospheric drag by now.

There was also the other Starlink satellite with a tank rupture last December [2]

A low number of dead satellites isn't an issue as the other satellites can steer around it. Their orbit also quickly decays to a level where it's below the orbital plane of the other satellites. The real danger is if a large enough number malfunction that they start colliding with each other at high speeds

1: https://starlink.com/public-files/Starlink_Approach_to_Satel...

2: https://www.space.com/space-exploration/satellites/a-spacex-...

Post reply on HN