81–90 of 147 posts
With falling cost of launch, there seems an opportunity to have a program to clean up orbital debris, funded by insurance premiums for orbits that don't self clean (like GEO). At least of the bigger debris.
We are far too light on execs causing irreparable harm to humanity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's 0.3 degrees ahead in orbit. Which means the debris needs to speed up to collide. It's possible if the break-up was explosive, but most, if not all of the debris is more likely to stay at the same velocity or slow down.
Speeding up does not work, that'll just put it in a higher orbit. My understanding of these issues is that introduced eccentricity gets you: if it takes the "inside corner" (is that the English word for binnenbocht/innenkurve?) around the earth, it could then then meet you on the other side where the orbits intersect. If it sped up (flying out of the corner, in this race analogy) and thereby took a longer way around,…
With falling cost of launch, there seems an opportunity to have a program to clean up orbital debris, funded by insurance premiums for orbits that don't self clean (like GEO). At least of the bigger debris.
Boeing should be forced to clean up the mess they made on their dime, or it's prison for the execs. We are far too light on execs causing irreparable harm to humanity.
The parent comment explained some reasonable contractual mechanisms for civil remedy - insurance etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's 0.3 degrees ahead in orbit. Which means the debris needs to speed up to collide. It's possible if the break-up was explosive, but most, if not all of the debris is more likely to stay at the same velocity or slow down.
So does that mean the other satellites "behind" it are in more danger?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's 0.3 degrees ahead in orbit. Which means the debris needs to speed up to collide. It's possible if the break-up was explosive, but most, if not all of the debris is more likely to stay at the same velocity or slow down.
Speeding up does not work, that'll just put it in a higher orbit. My understanding of these issues is that introduced eccentricity gets you: if it takes the "inside corner" (is that the English word for binnenbocht/innenkurve?) around the earth, it could then then meet you on the other side where the orbits intersect. If it sped up (flying out of the corner, in this race analogy) and thereby took a longer way around,…
Speeding up doesn't raise the orbit; it makes it (more) elliptical while still intersecting with the old orbit (shared with neighbouring satellites)- you need at least 2 maneuvers to raise an orbit. You're also assuming a perfectly pro-grade acceleration. In an explosion, different pieces go in different directions, I suspect there is a vector that results in faster speed in the same orbit, but I'm no rocket scientist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Wouldn't debris at the same address (after some time) therefore have zero relative motion?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> Know when to say when. People warned about exactly what happened already back in the time when the merger happened that introduced beancounter culture to Boeing. The problem was, as always, no one listens to the warners and the whiners when there is money to be made.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
Here's an article about that: https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/how-to-see-and-photogr...
There are commercial services that keep visual track of geostationary satellites. A couple of years ago, IIRC, a Russian satellite broke down and there were pictures of the disintegration.