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

Unexpected solar weather is accelerating satellites' orbital decay

space.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 106 posts

Re: Unexpected solar weather is accelerating satellites' orbital decay

#91

Post by pdabbadabba »

FunnyBadger wrote: post #70

This is simply part of the solar cycle. And it's a standard part of satellite planning when it comes to operational quality and reliability to account for solar cycle radiation effects. This is an ignorant fear article and/or an article written by someone who knows NOTHING about space launch and design. (I used to be a military rocket scientist specializing in radiation effects on space electronics many moons ago).

The article could be much clearer about this but no, this isn’t just about the standard solar cycle. The issue is that the sun has been more active in this portion of the solar cycle than predicted, resulting in greater atmospheric mass in LEO than anticipated. Planners knew that the cycle was ramping up, but may have underestimated its intensity.

Check out the NOAA solar cycle data: https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/solar-cycle-progression

You are right that operators plan for variations in solar activity. But it remains to be seen how many can cope with a significantly more active cycle than predicted.

Re: Unexpected solar weather is accelerating satellites' orbital decay

#92

Post by dylan604 »

FunnyBadger wrote: post #70

This is simply part of the solar cycle. And it's a standard part of satellite planning when it comes to operational quality and reliability to account for solar cycle radiation effects. This is an ignorant fear article and/or an article written by someone who knows NOTHING about space launch and design. (I used to be a military rocket scientist specializing in radiation effects on space electronics many moons ago).

>(I used to be a military rocket scientist specializing in radiation effects on space electronics many moons ago).

Great, and I'm sure literal rocket scientists are not space.com's target audience.

I read the article, and I didn't receive it as fear mongering at all. You might not be aware that people outside of rocket science are probably pretty ignorant of space weather and its direct affect on the Earth and its inhabitants. Putting a bit of explanation out there in a fairly easy way to understand is not a bad thing. As easy as this was to grasp, there will still be people that are confused after reading.

Re: Unexpected solar weather is accelerating satellites' orbital decay

#93

Post by formerkrogemp »

RosanaAnaDana wrote: post #16
not2b wrote: post #13

Too many HN threads just seem to be people arguing about the appropriateness of the title. The article addresses a significant and interesting issue that's going to have major negative effects on business models, as well as some positive effect on space junk. I think they did a decent job, at least for an article intended for the general public, and I'm glad I read it. And yes, the word "plummet" is an exaggeration.…

HN: come for the pedentry, stay for the pedentry on pedentry.

Pedantry for the peasantry. And pleasantly peering for pedantry on HN.

Re: Unexpected solar weather is accelerating satellites' orbital decay

#94

Post by thaumasiotes »

dylan604 wrote: post #23
Aachen wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a significant difference that has a real impact on the satellites. But we also don't say that airplanes plummet when landing or elevators when going down. To me at least, plummet signals it's a matter of seconds or, perhaps from great altitude, minutes until it hits the bottom. So to me, and that's knowing a thing or two about space, this title is just clickbait and not a good description of the phenomenon obser…

We absolutely refer to planes as plummeting, when the situation warrants. This article wasn't written for HN. It was written for the general audience that peruses Space.com. Because someone found it interesting and posted to HN is pretty much the only reason it is on HN. Space.com didn't submit it in hopes of gaining attention by a hypercritical audience. Yes, I agree it is click bait. I'm just playing devil's advoca…

> We absolutely refer to planes as plummeting, when the situation warrants.

Yes, and landing is not one of those situations. To describe a plane as "plummeting" requires that it crash (or recover and stay airborne) rather than landing.

Or in other words, Aachen's claim that "we also don't say that airplanes plummet when landing" was correct in every particular.

Re: Unexpected solar weather is accelerating satellites' orbital decay

#96

Post by CodeWriter23 »

dr_orpheus wrote: post #31
CodeWriter23 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well at that rate, it will crash into the Earth in…never

But it will though. The lowest satellites are at an altitude of 460 km above the Earth. And the decay of the satellite in to the Earth is exponential [0] so the unexpected drop is a significant impact on the lifetime of the spacecraft. You can see from the plot in that Orbital Decay that there is an altitude that it starts dropping very rapidly. So they may have expected it de-orbit in approximately 10 years, but now…

You don’t think it will burn to ashes during re-entry?

Re: Unexpected solar weather is accelerating satellites' orbital decay

#97

Post by palisade »

I wonder what this means for Starlink. I know that Elon put them into a slightly lower orbit accidentally than what they originally intended. Which probably had the positive side effect of better latency. But, now that solar weather is accelerating orbital decay, this perhaps affects Starlink more adversely than it would have otherwise.

Re: Unexpected solar weather is accelerating satellites' orbital decay

#99

Post by ngcc_hk »

FunnyBadger wrote: post #70

This is simply part of the solar cycle. And it's a standard part of satellite planning when it comes to operational quality and reliability to account for solar cycle radiation effects. This is an ignorant fear article and/or an article written by someone who knows NOTHING about space launch and design. (I used to be a military rocket scientist specializing in radiation effects on space electronics many moons ago).

Exactly. The issue is you cannot easy say “unexpected”. Whilst we cannot account for everything and there could be something new like mercury orbit is “unexpected” and not due to Vulcan (as suspected in one stage there is another planet inside its orbit).

Really what is unexpected.

Re: Unexpected solar weather is accelerating satellites' orbital decay

#100

Post by alar44 »

palisade wrote: post #97

I wonder what this means for Starlink. I know that Elon put them into a slightly lower orbit accidentally than what they originally intended. Which probably had the positive side effect of better latency. But, now that solar weather is accelerating orbital decay, this perhaps affects Starlink more adversely than it would have otherwise.

That wouldn't affect latency in any noticable way.
Post reply on HN