One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day • Hacker News Board

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#191

Post by VBprogrammer » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 9:53 PM UTC

lxgr wrote: post #171

shizcakes wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: okay I misunderstood what everyone meant

> please recall that the mass of de-orbiting man-made satellites came from the earth in the first place. Then again, so are CFCs, CO2, radioactive materials... Just because some elements naturally occur on Earth doesn't mean we're completely insensitive to where they end up. (That said, I have no idea if atmospheric Aluminium is actually a problem or not.)

I was watching a video the other day which happened to mention that sodium lasers are used to create artificial stars, used for calibration of adaptive optics in ground based telescopes. This works because one particular layer of the upper atmosphere is rich in sodium due to impact with sodium rich debris.

Obviously it requires a more scientific analysis but it does seem to me that burning a lot of shit on the atmosphere might be problematic.

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#192

Post by wmf » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 9:54 PM UTC

Fischgericht wrote: post #131

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "But why are you only assuming a usage time of 3 years?" Your entire analysis rests on this point, which you fail to demonstrate. (You also cite zero sources, which isn't encouraging.) (EDIT: This assumption is conservative, but reasonable.) Was this AI generated? > The cable itself costs virtually nothing Did you attempt to look up the cost of laying new fibre trunk? > due to their Satellites now being massively o…

Wow. Well, I believe that YOU are a bot, not me. Are you Grok? Anyway, yes, I am a human. And it is not that hard to find the sources for this point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starlink_and_Starshiel... v1 constellation was completed in 2021, and decommissioned from 2024. v2 deployed from 2023, but the sat-to-sat communication is not working, so all of them, will need to be replaced by v3, too.

The sat-to-sat laser links are used to provide connectivity on the open ocean and in remote parts of Australia and Argentina that are beyond the range of any ground station. They're definitely working but AFAIK they are only used when necessary so if you're within range of a ground station your traffic will never use laser links.

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#193

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 9:54 PM UTC

runarberg wrote: post #132

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is very easy to google Then it should be easy to cite. Astronomers have complained. But I haven't seen anyone link that to output, including the complaining astronomers.

Search term: "low earth orbit satellite effects on astronomy" first result: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41550-023-01904-2

OP said "scientific advancement has suffered from the light pollution," past tense. Your source explores a "potentially large rise in global sky brightness," and an "expected...rapid rise in night sky brightness."

These are not risks to be ignored. But we haven't even observed or quantified them, which is the first step to weighing mitigation options. (Which could be physical, e.g. lowering satellite reflectivity. Or geographic, putting more observatories are higher latitudes. Or even statistical, by launching space-based calibration telescopes, or building more array-based observatories.)

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#194

Post by Fischgericht » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 9:54 PM UTC

lxgr wrote: post #176

Fischgericht wrote: post #66

[Disclaimer: Not a hater, just a Nerd looking at data.] And just as Tesla's stock goes up whenever there are reports about them no longer selling cars, or being years behind on self-driving tech and robotics... if Starlink would be publicly traded, their stock would now shoot way up. On a more serious note: If analysts would do their job, they could have found out years ago that Starlink will never ever be profitable…

> The "Oops, the Sat-to-Sat links are not working, so we now have to build base stations everywhere and can not do load distribution" might have cost Starlink something like $10 BILLION? I guess I would have tested my stuff first before launching it. With now two generations of Starlink sats already being outdated and/or falling from the sky You don't seem to understand their strategy: Constant replacement is a featu…

Due to the nature of the business I am in I very well know Viasats customer base. They are too important to fail for multiple european military organizations.

As discussed elsewhere in this thread, the intra-links still do not seem to be enabled. Can not verify myself due not having a yacht and/or time, but I am constantly flying between Asia and Europe with various airlines, and so far none of them have switched to Starlink but keep paying the outrageous pricing from ViaSat & co.

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#195

Post by Fischgericht » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 9:57 PM UTC

wmf wrote: post #192

Fischgericht wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. Well, I believe that YOU are a bot, not me. Are you Grok? Anyway, yes, I am a human. And it is not that hard to find the sources for this point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starlink_and_Starshiel... v1 constellation was completed in 2021, and decommissioned from 2024. v2 deployed from 2023, but the sat-to-sat communication is not working, so all of them, will need to be replaced by v3, too.

The sat-to-sat laser links are used to provide connectivity on the open ocean and in remote parts of Australia and Argentina that are beyond the range of any ground station. They're definitely working but AFAIK they are only used when necessary so if you're within range of a ground station your traffic will never use laser links.

I will not disagree as I can not verify this claim. Have you tested it yourself or have a source which has some tech proof on that one?

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#196

Post by Fischgericht » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 9:59 PM UTC

wmf wrote: post #192

Fischgericht wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. Well, I believe that YOU are a bot, not me. Are you Grok? Anyway, yes, I am a human. And it is not that hard to find the sources for this point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starlink_and_Starshiel... v1 constellation was completed in 2021, and decommissioned from 2024. v2 deployed from 2023, but the sat-to-sat communication is not working, so all of them, will need to be replaced by v3, too.

The sat-to-sat laser links are used to provide connectivity on the open ocean and in remote parts of Australia and Argentina that are beyond the range of any ground station. They're definitely working but AFAIK they are only used when necessary so if you're within range of a ground station your traffic will never use laser links.

Oops, forgot one important thing: Sure, why do additional hops if you can see the base station. But what about shared state? Why do you definitely still get a completely new session when moving to the next sat? If the laser links are working, that state should be shared between neighboring sats.

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#197

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 9:59 PM UTC

Fischgericht wrote: post #163

stronglikedan wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Was this AI generated? It's crazy to me that people use AI to generate comments for social sites of all things, but here we are.

I find it even more crazy that you no longer can comment on HN without someone trying to invalidate valid points by claiming you not being human. :) To be honest, while I took it lightly, others might feel pretty insulted by such claims. De-humanizing someone stinks.

> you no longer can comment on HN without someone trying to invalidate valid points by claiming you not being human

I made this mistake, but I'll defend it by pointing out that I've gone a few comments deep on HN, thinking through and citing and engaging in good faith, only to realise I wasn't talking to a human but to a bot. (Then the commenter gets defensive about using a bot, hallucinations and all.)

Instead of taking it as a personal insult, maybe interpret it as your comment having inspired someone to engage effortfully with what you said.

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#198

Post by lxgr » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 10:01 PM UTC

Fischgericht wrote: post #194

lxgr wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "Oops, the Sat-to-Sat links are not working, so we now have to build base stations everywhere and can not do load distribution" might have cost Starlink something like $10 BILLION? I guess I would have tested my stuff first before launching it. With now two generations of Starlink sats already being outdated and/or falling from the sky You don't seem to understand their strategy: Constant replacement is a featu…

Due to the nature of the business I am in I very well know Viasats customer base. They are too important to fail for multiple european military organizations. As discussed elsewhere in this thread, the intra-links still do not seem to be enabled. Can not verify myself due not having a yacht and/or time, but I am constantly flying between Asia and Europe with various airlines, and so far none of them have switched to…

> Due to the nature of the business I am in I very well know Viasats customer base. They are too important to fail for multiple european military organizations.

So there is demand :)

> As discussed elsewhere in this thread, the intra-links still do not seem to be enabled. Can not verify myself due not having a yacht and/or time

Are you arguing that everybody reporting successfully using it far away from land is part of some conspiracy? How else would SpaceX get away with claiming that they have global coverage?

> I am constantly flying between Asia and Europe with various airlines, and so far none of them have switched to Starlink but keep paying the outrageous pricing from ViaSat & co.

Installing a new satellite terminal on the outer hull of a commercial aircraft costs millions, including the lost time spent in the hangar, and that's to say nothing about all the required certifications.

That said, Hawaiian Airlines have been using it for a few months now. Seems to be working great, and their routes are also definitely not possible to cover from LEO without inter-satellite links.

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#199

Post by dweinus » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 10:01 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #82

dweinus wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we wanted to subsidize internet for rural and low-income communities responsibly, we could invest in fiber and other solutions, and control the externalities (this is exactly the ReConnect program is). Starlink is not that, it is a classic case of privatizing profits by socializing hidden externalities, in this case to the entire world. Externalities in the form of pollution that will cost us all more than fiber i…

> If we wanted to subsidize internet for rural and low-income communities responsibly, we could invest in fiber and other solutions, and control the externalities Running cables across out land is less impactful than lofting satellites?

Per the article, Starlink runs 8k satellites with an average life of 5 years. They launch in payloads of 20-40 satellites. That's 50+ launches per year if everything goes perfectly. About a million pounds of kerosene per launch. Plus everything else that goes into the rockets and satellites. Then the pollution impact from the launches and reentries. Then the eventual need to clean up LOE to avoid Kessler Syndrome. So yeah, well understood ground tech may be cheaper over the lifecycle. At a minimum, it should be a reasoned choice, not environmental debt pawned off by the richest man in the world.

Re: One to two Starlink satellites are falling back to Earth each day

#200

Post by JumpCrisscross » Mon, Oct 06, 2025, 10:02 PM UTC

Fischgericht wrote: post #196

wmf wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sat-to-sat laser links are used to provide connectivity on the open ocean and in remote parts of Australia and Argentina that are beyond the range of any ground station. They're definitely working but AFAIK they are only used when necessary so if you're within range of a ground station your traffic will never use laser links.

Oops, forgot one important thing: Sure, why do additional hops if you can see the base station. But what about shared state? Why do you definitely still get a completely new session when moving to the next sat? If the laser links are working, that state should be shared between neighboring sats.

> Why do you definitely still get a completely new session when moving to the next sat? If the laser links are working

Imagine Amazon 10x'd its ingress/egress fees between regions.