Removing these 50 objects from orbit would cut danger from space junk in half
arstechnica.com
“In their rush to move quickly, they are adding to the long-term collision hazard.”…
    •  burble   ( @burble@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
      2·
      2 months ago

      Starlink isn’t actually that bad in terms of space junk. They’ve been actively deorbiting Gen 1 and partially failed ones. The amount that are uncontrolled junk just passively deorbiting is really small.

      • Starlink total sats launched: 9896

      • Total down: 1329 (includes Gen 1 disposal and previous failures)

      • Total failed, decaying: 16

      So they currently have 16 junk Starlinks that should be gone in the next few years.

      Source.

      •  twix   ( @twix@infosec.pub ) 
        3·
        2 months ago

        No starlink is bad. It’s currently deorbiting 1-2 satellites a day, which means half a ton of aluminum and other metals burnt up in the atmosphere. Current ambition mean they will need to start deorbiting 3-5 satellites per day.

        We don’t know yet what ecological impact this will have. But I’m having a hard time accepting such wasteful energy and material consumption.

        •  spacesatan   ( @spacesatan@leminal.space ) English
          3·
          2 months ago

          NASA claims the Earth is hit with 48.5 tons of natural meteoric debris every day, much of it being metallic. Somehow that hasn’t been an issue in all of history so far.

          A ton is such an absurdly insignificant amount of material on a global scale.

        •  burble   ( @burble@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
          2·
          2 months ago

          I understand Kessler Syndrome and am not saying that it isn’t possible. I just think Starlink is the wrong constellation to be mad about. There are two points I’m trying to make here about Starlink:

          1. Their orbit is low, so it doesn’t matter as much if their birds die because they passively deorbit.
          2. SpaceX has been a good steward of their orbits and don’t have much dead junk up there.

          The low orbit point is also made in that Wikipedia page that you linked:

          Starlink satellites are launched at a lower altitude of 550 km … and failed satellites or debris are thus expected to deorbit within five years even without propulsion, due to atmospheric drag.

          I added the source to my comment above about the deorbit/junk stats.

  •  Hirom   ( @Hirom@beehaw.org ) 
    3·
    2 months ago

    This kind of strategy, ie targetting a small number of debris that create the most risk, makes this problem more manageable than deorbiting thousands.

    This give some hope to avoid the Kessler Symdrom. Altough space agencies would need to deorbit junk faster than they’re orbiting it.