Low Earth Orbit Visualization • Hacker News Board

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#31

Post by Polizeiposaune » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:04 AM UTC

adastra22 wrote: post #6

Dragonborn wrote: post #2

[flagged]

Starlink satellites are in low enough orbit to decay on very short timescales. More worrisome are Russian satellites in high / very long lived orbits that tend to spontaneously explode.

Not just Russian. There have also been a few cases recently where spent Centaur upper stages -- which were thought to have been completely passivated -- broke apart for unknown reasons. These were in a geosynchronous transfer orbit (with apogee near geosynchronous orbit, perigee down near LEO) so the debris won't decay any time soon.

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#32

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:07 AM UTC

mlindner wrote: post #26

corrino1 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

That's not true. Starlink was developed for its stated purpose. It's a conspiracy pushed by Russian plants that it's for missile defense. A lot of information on that wiki page is made up. Like the constant talk of griffin.

[deleted]

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#33

Post by adastra22 » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:20 AM UTC

AngryData wrote: post #23

adastra22 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They actually explode. https://spacenews.com/low-intensity-explosion-caused-russian...

To be fair the article also said it could have been a collision, even if it isn't super likely.

It's not the only one, just the most recent. A collision can't be ruled out, but there is a frequent tendency of old, retired Russian satellites just exploding for no reason:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_debris_producing...

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#34

Post by adastra22 » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:22 AM UTC

Polizeiposaune wrote: post #31

adastra22 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink satellites are in low enough orbit to decay on very short timescales. More worrisome are Russian satellites in high / very long lived orbits that tend to spontaneously explode.

Not just Russian. There have also been a few cases recently where spent Centaur upper stages -- which were thought to have been completely passivated -- broke apart for unknown reasons. These were in a geosynchronous transfer orbit (with apogee near geosynchronous orbit, perigee down near LEO) so the debris won't decay any time soon.

Upper stages breaking apart is kinda expected. It's a rocket, and it has rocket fuel (explosives) on board. Derelict spy satellites, on the other hand, shouldn't be just going kaboom for no reason. But the Russian ones do.

As noted by another poster, prior to the recent ASAT tests, one of the largest sources of junk was old Soviet nuclear-powered satellites leaking coolant and/or having their pressure vessels explode. Mind you these are actual nuclear reactors, not RTGs.

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#35

Post by Polizeiposaune » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:28 AM UTC

adastra22 wrote: post #34

Polizeiposaune wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just Russian. There have also been a few cases recently where spent Centaur upper stages -- which were thought to have been completely passivated -- broke apart for unknown reasons. These were in a geosynchronous transfer orbit (with apogee near geosynchronous orbit, perigee down near LEO) so the debris won't decay any time soon.

Upper stages breaking apart is kinda expected. It's a rocket, and it has rocket fuel (explosives) on board. Derelict spy satellites, on the other hand, shouldn't be just going kaboom for no reason. But the Russian ones do. As noted by another poster, prior to the recent ASAT tests, one of the largest sources of junk was old Soviet nuclear-powered satellites leaking coolant and/or having their pressure vessels explode…

No, all residual fuel (and anything pressurized) should have been vented after the last burn and there shouldn't be anything left on board with enough energy to cause it to break apart.

It's a real mystery.

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#36

Post by dostick » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:32 AM UTC

If you zoom in, about one in 20 is tumbling around path randomly, and its description is “Rocket body”. But it’s not on “Debris” layer. I wonder why it doesn’t qualify for debris if it looks likely uncontrollable.

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#37

Post by orbital-decay » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:38 AM UTC

elliottkember wrote: post #8

Objects not to scale. Not even close, and no mention of it (that I saw). Graphing scale honestly is extremely important. A lot of people are convinced our sky is full of satellites because of visualizations like this.

Some kind of a relative velocity at the closest approach or a collision probability overlay would be way more useful to have than proper scale. That would make it immediately clear that lazy well-kept orbits like GEO are much safer than e.g. 567km SSO at the poles. Or some color coding for the apparent magnitude.

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#38

Post by SeriousM » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:45 AM UTC

dhosek wrote: post #12

elliottkember wrote: post #8

Objects not to scale. Not even close, and no mention of it (that I saw). Graphing scale honestly is extremely important. A lot of people are convinced our sky is full of satellites because of visualizations like this.

Proper scale makes the visualization impractical. I wrote about this with respect to a US map showing mountains on my mailing list: https://dahosek.substack.com/p/one-million-stories “any accurate depiction of elevation would be indistinguishable from a flat map at that scale. The coast-to-coast measure of the US is a bit under 3000 miles, while the highest elevation in the continental US is a bit under 4½ miles abov…

That would also mean that whenever I see a flat geo image, it could be a heightmap from a creator that was just too honest about scale.

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#39

Post by didgetmaster » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:48 AM UTC

elliottkember wrote: post #8

Objects not to scale. Not even close, and no mention of it (that I saw). Graphing scale honestly is extremely important. A lot of people are convinced our sky is full of satellites because of visualizations like this.

Scale distortion is very practical when differences are either miniscule or astronomical. A poster of our solar system where the sun and planets are at scale would look like a black piece of paper with a tiny white dot in the center.

Re: Low Earth Orbit Visualization

#40

Post by ricksunny » Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 5:50 AM UTC

Polizeiposaune wrote: post #31

adastra22 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink satellites are in low enough orbit to decay on very short timescales. More worrisome are Russian satellites in high / very long lived orbits that tend to spontaneously explode.

Not just Russian. There have also been a few cases recently where spent Centaur upper stages -- which were thought to have been completely passivated -- broke apart for unknown reasons. These were in a geosynchronous transfer orbit (with apogee near geosynchronous orbit, perigee down near LEO) so the debris won't decay any time soon.

(May I ask what definition of ‘passivate’ you are applying here? Even allowing for flexibility in the definition or autocorrect, and applying context, I can’t fathom what is intended to be conveyed by ‘upper stages - which were thought to have been completely passivated’)