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

Intelsat 33e breaks up in geostationary orbit

spacenews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 147 posts

Re: Intelsat 33e breaks up in geostationary orbit

#61

Post by kjs3 »

dylan604 wrote: post #9
SteveNuts wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should teach it in every MBA program in the country /s.

You joke, but it absolutely should. Boeing is a great example of "when all you have is a hammer, everything is a nail". When MBAs are left in charge with no guardrails, this is what can happen. That's a great thing to teach to new MBAs. Every field has this potential pitfall. When you hyperfocus, bad things can happen. Know when to say when.

If you get your MBA at Emory University, you learn about the New Coke fiasco. In a building named after Roberto C. Goizueta. The Coke executive responsible for New Coke. I suspect the irony is often lost on the latest cadre of MBA grads.

Re: Intelsat 33e breaks up in geostationary orbit

#62

Post by tomp »

matrix2003 wrote: post #11
nordsieck wrote: post #4

It is particularly bad for a satellite in geostationary orbit to break up or fail. Satellites are packed as tightly as possible into that orbit due to its economic importance (it's very useful for a satellite, particularly communications satellites, to always be over the same part of the Earth), so there is a higher than normal likelihood that this could be seriously disruptive.

Not to mention debris can be in GEO for a long, long time. People worry about LEO constellations causing Kessler syndrome, but the reality is that LEO debris deorbits in the order of months/years. GEO is much, much longer.

no

if it remains in GEO orbit (same speed vector), it will remain in same "place" relative to other satellites, and won't ever hit them

if it changes speed vector, it's no longer in GEO orbit

Re: Intelsat 33e breaks up in geostationary orbit

#64

Post by anjel »

ben_w wrote: post #38
naikrovek wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're physically hundreds of kilometers apart. That’s pretty close when your neighbor just exploded and there’s almost exactly zero air resistance to prevent debris from reaching you.

Yes there's no air resistance, but also most of the fragments aren't going your way. If you have a 25 m^2 cross section in the direction of the explosion, at that distance you have a roughly 1 in 246 billion chance of any given bit of debris hitting you.

It might not place neighbors at appreciable risk but wouldn't debris still prevent replacing the failed satellite with another one at the same precious original address?

Re: Intelsat 33e breaks up in geostationary orbit

#67

Post by ethbr1 »

throw4950sh06 wrote: post #45
ben_w wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes there's no air resistance, but also most of the fragments aren't going your way. If you have a 25 m^2 cross section in the direction of the explosion, at that distance you have a roughly 1 in 246 billion chance of any given bit of debris hitting you.

What is the chance of getting hit by further broken pieces of that satellite and other satellites? When calculating risk, you have to take into account how many are there and what is the chance that any will be hit. Then you have to calculate what's the chance this will happen again, etc - and only then you can calculate the risk to your own satellite. It's true that the chance of getting hit by one broken satellite…

Aka Kessler syndrome [0] or neutron flux / cross-section (and associated equations, if you want to model it that way) [1].

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_flux

Re: Intelsat 33e breaks up in geostationary orbit

#68

Post by lupusreal »

Tepix wrote: post #40
naikrovek wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They're physically hundreds of kilometers apart. That’s pretty close when your neighbor just exploded and there’s almost exactly zero air resistance to prevent debris from reaching you.

Getting hit by debris that flies away directly from an explosion would very bad luck indeed. Just think about how well you would have to aim to hit someone 10km away. But some debris (in particular slower pieces) will probably oscillate around the geostationary orbit giving it countless chances of hitting other satellites. Has someone modelled this for example in Kerbal space program?

> But some debris (in particular slower pieces) will probably oscillate around the geostationary orbit giving it countless chances of hitting other satellites.

Almost all of the debris will have orbits which intersect their orbit of origin.

Re: Intelsat 33e breaks up in geostationary orbit

#69

Post by throw4950sh06 »

ethbr1 wrote: post #67
throw4950sh06 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the chance of getting hit by further broken pieces of that satellite and other satellites? When calculating risk, you have to take into account how many are there and what is the chance that any will be hit. Then you have to calculate what's the chance this will happen again, etc - and only then you can calculate the risk to your own satellite. It's true that the chance of getting hit by one broken satellite…

Aka Kessler syndrome [0] or neutron flux / cross-section (and associated equations, if you want to model it that way) [1]. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_flux

That's if the risk comes out at 100%, but there's some space below that.

Re: Intelsat 33e breaks up in geostationary orbit

#70

Post by sharpshadow »

Another blunder for Boeing right up next to naming things „Epic Next Generation“…

What’s with the missing insurance? Didn’t they get any insurance because of the previous debacle with a Intelsat where they couldn’t decide if it was a internal or external source? Who would pay now if debris causes damage?

Interesting to see the Space Force now mentioned and following the Wikipedia list[1] the standard procedure seem to be to create a new agency every couple of decades which takes over the previous one but with a new name. What are the reasons for this?

Edit: [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_forces,_units,...

Post reply on HN