181–190 of 508 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 50 years ago, losing 40 satellites would have been a significant portion made me think "100 years ago, it would have been (40/0)*0.01 = infinity percent", which probably means i need to lay off the coffee a bit.
Should be more than zero though, no? https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/infographics/an-early-history-of-sa...
is that what you're meaning?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. But they're designed to burn up on entry. I think it's been mentioned on HN that the delay in their laser link network was due to the need to redesign the laser component to ensure it would break up.
When people say something will "burn up on reentry", a phrase that I've heard almost all of my life but never really given much thought too, how burnt are we talking? Surely it doesn't just completely atomize?
I'd also imagine that at some point in this breaking-up-process the pieces are small enough to sublimate from the extreme heat, i.e. "burning up".
Is anyone else concerned by their statement? i.e. in spite serious engineering efforts to ensure satellites function+orbit or nonfunction+deorbit, they don’t assert or furnish a way of understanding (today or at some future date), that of the 49 satellites: * how many are functional+orbiting * how many are nonfunctional+orbiting (i.e. space junk) * how many are nonfunctional+deorbit(ing|ed)
1. The storm caused the atmosphere to expand
2. which increases drag on satellites.
3. The satellites were in safe mode because of the storm, so…
4. some satellites fell out of orbit because they couldn’t produce enough thrust to recover after the storm
No satellite was ever even at risk of becoming space junk. This is pretty read TFA stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only reason they are lost is because they fell too far down. How could they possibly fail to deorbit?
I fully expect they will. But I want to actually see it happen instead of just blindly regurgitating corporate statements that it won't be a worry in the near future.
Unlike a lot of their claims, this is basic physics. Why would you need to see it happen? Like, you didn't answer my question. It wasn't about what you expect. I asked how anything else could happen.
I recently started researching into Starlink as my next (cheap) internet solution and stumbled upon these 2 videos below. The worst part for me is that once this becomes more popular the bandwidth will die down to crumble. I don't buy they will be able to upkeep with bandwidth sharing it from satellite to satellite using a.. laser beam (is that even possible to sync 2 satellites and send signal thru laser beam that h…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder who'll write their orbituary.
New York Times Capital City, Earth – Satellite Starlink XB-4590 has shut down yesterday, February 8, 2132, following a geomagnetic storm that irreparably crippled its circuits. XB-4590 was 5 months old. It is survived by the 32,008 other active Starlink satellites orbiting the Earth. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk IV declined to comment for this article.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even more strongly, SpaceX launches to a ~200km orbit and has the satellites raise themselves. This way any satellites without attitude control deorbit immediately. Also, the vast majority of SpaceX satellites will be at 350km.
Your numbers are a bit on the low side. They start off at a 350 km ( https://in-the-sky.org/spacecraft.php?id=50803 was launched earlier this year). They then raise them to about a 550 km orbit for its operational lifetime ( https://in-the-sky.org/spacecraft.php?id=45102 ) And then they lower it a bit, and it decays more rapidly ( https://in-the-sky.org/spacecraft.php?id=44249 ) Another one that didn't go operational…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink#cite_note-sn20170917-...
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? There was a G1 warning posted until 21:00 UTC on the launch date: Space Weather Message Code: WARK05 Serial Number: 1635 Issue Time: 2022 Feb 03 1428 UTC EXTENDED WARNING: Geomagnetic K-index of 5 expected Extension to Serial Number: 1634 Valid From: 2022 Feb 03 0…
"Does SpaceX not review the data / warnings before launch?" is peak Hacker News pettiness. Try not to assume the worst, especially when it's pretty silly.
In my opinion it's pretty clear the jist of his message is "how did this happen when there was a freely available warning"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Does SpaceX not review the data / warnings before launch?" is peak Hacker News pettiness. Try not to assume the worst, especially when it's pretty silly.
It is really up there with the HN classic "Does anyone else think the entire multi billion dollar targeted advertising industry is a scam that doesn't work?"