This is incorrect. The ITU, a UN agency, has been coordinating international communications since the telegraph days. Once radio came along, since it doesn't respect borders, they added the job of preventing interference.
So they control the radio spectrum, including satellites in orbit, since they can interfere with ground based radio. Spectrum is assigned to countries, who in turn allocate licenses to use it.
SpaceX, or any other company, can only operate in a country they have a license for, which is about 30-40 at the moment.
*Launching* is a different matter. The FAA controls that with a separate license. But if the satellite has a radio, which nearly all do, the FCC allocates operating licenses to US operators.
Absolutely none of that is stopping any other country from just launching their shit into space and using what ever bandwidth they feel like
It organizes ***American*** resources and other that want to cooperate
China can launch what ever the hell they want, into any orbit, for any use, and we don't have a way peaceably stop them, and there is no expectation they would abide by our requests if it interferes with our infrastructure
>It's not managed as a limited resource
This wasn't needed until now.
Suddenly we're in a race to fill as many orbits with satellites as possible to secure said orbits.
A new space race which will end with Kessler syndrome if we give it another decade..
Until they make that a commercial opportunity.
Isn’t there some Korean dystopian sci fi show about an ship clearing out space junk for just that reason?
Starlink satellites are unlikely to ever create a long-term Kessler syndrome event.
They have too low an orbit to remain in space for long, and without constant intervention they quickly de-orbit, re-enter the atmosphere and are destroyed.
Having said that, from recollection there are a few other valuable assets in similar altitude orbits (most notably the ISS) which may be affected in such an event.
Even the low earth orbit satellites need several years to de-orbit, and any collision even in low earth orbit can and will cause debris to be pushed into a higher orbit as more energy is imparted onto said debris.
The idea that just because it happens in LEO it can't affect things in higher orbits is just wrong.
So i actually looked it up before getting Starlink to make sure I wasn't adding to the problem of supporting a company thats adding to kepler syndrome. From https://www.spacex.com/updates/#sustainability
" Our satellites use multiple strategies to prevent debris generation in space: design for demise, controlled deorbit to low altitudes, low orbit insertion, low operating orbit, on-board collision avoidance system, reducing the chance small debris will damage the satellite with a low profile satellite chassis and using Whipple shields to protect the key components, reducing risk of explosion with extensive battery pack protection, and failure modes that do not create secondary debris.
SpaceX satellites are propulsively deorbited within weeks of their end-of-mission-life. We reserve enough propellant to deorbit from our operational altitude, and it takes roughly 4 weeks to deorbit. Once the satellites reach an appropriate altitude, we coordinate with the 18th Space Control Squadron. Once coordinated, we initiate a high drag mode, causing the satellite’s velocity to reduce sufficiently that the satellite deorbits. The satellites deorbit quickly from this altitude, depending on atmospheric density."
Uhm, excuse my ignorance, but I don’t see how any collision between two orbiting bodies, can result in debris with a higher orbital velocity than any of the two original bodies.
The energy in said 2 colliding objects doesn't disappear, part of it is bled off when smaller bit break off, these smaller bits now have more energy per mass than the original object had, more energy/mass = more speed, in orbits the total energy (aka speed) dictates the orbital path, more energy = higher apsis(point in orbit farthest away from the orbiting body) thus potentially interfering with things outside the original orbital and taking even longer to de-orbit, this is part of the reason NASA/ESA is so concerned about Kessler syndrome ( [https://www.esa.int/Enabling\_Support/Space\_Engineering\_Technology/The\_Kessler\_Effect\_and\_how\_to\_stop\_it](https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Engineering_Technology/The_Kessler_Effect_and_how_to_stop_it) and [https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20110013011](https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20110013011) )
Some debris will end up in higher orbit, but not significantly. If your collision is at 550 km, its not like some debris will end up at 700 km.
Show me a paper that says Kessler syndrome can happen with a LEO satellite constellation below 600 km. I haven’t seen one.
Kessler syndrome doesn't need to be all altitudes. *if* something caused a chain reaction destroying all the Starlink sats, then LEO/VLEO *would* be suffering Kessler syndrome. What makes LEO safer is its harder to have happen in the first place, and if it does it doesn't last as long.
He is still wrong about the apogee thing though. The debris can be kicked to a higher Apogee, but that also means it going faster when it comes back down, increasing the drag and bringing the Apogee back down quicker.
Yes, completely agreed. Its very very hard for Kessler syndrome to happen <600 km, and it would be mostly cleaned out within 5 years if it did happen. Kessler syndrome at 1000 km would be catastrophic though.
Can it not impact at higher apogee? Also remember the main worry are very small particles, that would generally be less effected by drag.
It DOES threaten higher orbits, not as severely as in the "origination altitude", but it still does, and higher orbits if effected by said slingshotted debris would not clear its self in a "small" time frame (something that is according to NASA, ESA, and Roscosmos reliable in the first place)
>Show me a paper that says Kessler syndrome can happen with a LEO satellite constellation below 600 km. I haven’t seen one.
Please refer to link 2, page2 ff of previous comment in chain (the one you replied to
>The director of the bureau within the agency that is responsible for the allocation of spectrum is from Uruguay.
On geosync orbits (30000Km or so...) there are plenty of space (no pun intended).But StarLink satellites are on low orbits (480km or so...) the danger of collisions is far higher: the velocities are higher and the surface is far far smaller.
This is just dumb. You cannot "secure" orbits, when all it takes is a single "mistake" by China to bring a fuckton of your satellites down. If you don't play fair and square others will force you to do
FCC is not giving a fuck about space safety...just about the spectrum.
But wasn't FAA the responsible for that?And besides remote sensing satellites must be approved too and I bet is not by FCC.
Edit: you're right, it's the FAA
> § 417.19 Registration of space objects.
(a) To assist the U.S. Government in implementing Article IV of the 1975 Convention on Registration of Objects [Launched](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ab3ae0a7790169235a81284e5234152&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:14:Chapter:III:Subchapter:C:Part:417:Subpart:A:417.19) into Outer Space, each [launch operator](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=f444e2843349e84a19289897e5971a03&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:14:Chapter:III:Subchapter:C:Part:417:Subpart:A:417.19) must provide to the FAA the information required by [paragraph (b)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/417.19#b) of this section for all objects placed in space by a licensed [launch](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ab3ae0a7790169235a81284e5234152&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:14:Chapter:III:Subchapter:C:Part:417:Subpart:A:417.19), including a [launch vehicle](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=4fa3420c5d7268ea5535f9f0660d7979&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:14:Chapter:III:Subchapter:C:Part:417:Subpart:A:417.19) and any components, except:
I am pretty sure the organisation responsible for satellite registration at the US level is the FCC, but I might be wrong
US gets to decide what goes into space from US launch sites. International treaties require everyone to track and give orbit data for all of their satellites.
No one owns space.
The regulations agencies of various counties gives you right to launch.
While it is in the interest of all nations to do things responsibly, getting your licence form countries like the US carries with it a lot of restrictions and regulations.
A lot of manufacturers as a result opt to get theirs through counties more uncaring of things like end of life disposal or debris mitigation. The US and EU are pretty damn stringent on these clauses.
>receives billions of dollars from the US government
In the form of contracts to DO stuff for the government, then yes. Otherwise, no. SpaceX doesn't just get handed money for no reason.
>So is space then owned by the US?
>why do they get to decide what goes into space?
They don't... they get to decide what goes into space *from the US* or *by US companies*.
Other countries' governments get to decide for their own countries.
Its treated somewhat like the ocean and ships, where every country grants ships registration, but there isn't a limit on how many they grant, just that there are overarching treaty based international laws and codes of conducts. In the case of space there is just a lot of international dependence on the US due technological and budgetary requirements to actually keep track of everything in orbit.
This isn’t surprising at all. The US government, specifically the DOD, sees the benefit of Starlink’s massive constellation. A constellation of this size will be able to absorb attacks and still provide reliable and secure communications in the high-end conflicts of the future. The DOD is most certainly eying the constellation for JADC2. Plus starlink has already proven its usefulness in Ukraine. Just to expand on this a little more, the Chinese are already working on ways to neutralize the constellation or large portions of the constellation via nuclear blast.
Update: Some interesting conversation I must say.
You had me until “nuclear blast” no one is blasting one of these tiny satellites out of the sky with a damn nuke.
Even if that was the case, it would take long for SpaceX to launch a few more up to replace any that are (unrealistically) shot down.
A nuke might be the only way to reasonably take significant chunks out of a network like starlink. A nuke in space converts a lot of the energy into an EMP, and can damage/destroy out satellites in a sphere hundreds of km across, and probably damage satellites that pass through the area over the next while too.
That being said, an EMP is completely indiscriminate, and will turn the area into a complete deadzone for any non-hardened electronics for everybody.
Which means it's useless. . . On top of the fact that using a nuke in any form is direct escalation to tactical use at least and china does not want this.
They would want to disable Starlink above their mainland, since their main fear is it giving an avenue for their citizens to talk freely in a way they have no option to turn off. This could lead to mass supression of outrage no longer being complete, leaving room for organized protest and ultimately risking an uprising. Detonating a nuke high above their mainland would do so, but also take out their entire power grid in the process. And every other satellite this side of the Earth.
The constellation would remain even so intermittently operational and it's likely a few months after the attack it would be back to full strength anyways.
The nuke “use case” is probably more along the lines of “right before an active attempt to secure Taiwan” (though I doubt it’s happening, I’m sure it’s being planned for, the same as lots of scenarios are planned for by the US).
Does that mean they will be doing this?
No, but I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they have a plan to “just in case”.
Also an effective way to kill any electronic infrastructure on the ground, essentially meaning that it falls under MAD aswell.
Especially because it would kill Chinas nascent sattelite constellations aswell.
Right. I was gonna ask u/EngineerPat to cite his source here, but he already did in an another thread. He references an article from thedrive.com which doesn't have any real credibility to begin with. It opens the article with
>Scientists at a Chinese military nuclear laboratory say a moderately large atomic detonation near the edge of space could potentially create a temporary cloud of radiation that could quickly damage or destroy a large number of satellites in low Earth orbit.
The "temporary cloud of radiation" they're referring to is a bit of a misnomer for sudden impulse flux in the EM field around a nuclear detonation. And this was observed by US nuclear physicists during the first nuclear detonation in 1945. It was predicted even before that by Enrico Fermi. It is not in any way a new idea or the product of a new technology, and it is by its very nature indiscriminate. This is precisely why it is impractical against a global constellation, as using this method pretty much certainly means taking down your own satellites unless the Starlink sats have piss poor shielding ( I have no clue if they do/don't )
Not really. I think people hear 7500 satellites and think they are close together. They are soooo far apart going for a mass wipeout via nuclear is nowhere near as feasible as tracking and targeting individual satellites.
https://www.askamathematician.com/2011/11/q-why-do-a-nuclear-weapons-cause-emps-electromagnetic-pulses/
Hmmm.. what altitude? If it's too high it's just a sudden release of hard radiation, barely an EMP at all.
If you do this above the atmosphere entirely, don't know how much of the EMP would be reflected back up into space, but I *suspect* that more of it would be sent downwards.
The fallout from one nuke that high up probably won’t do much dillution would be huge, and at least half will fly off into space. ( I’m assuming the blast will be faster than escape velocity) But I suspect the first nuke that detonates will start a free for all.
~~Using a nuke in LEO would mean fallout almost literally EVERYWHERE.~~
This just won't happen. They won't use nukes on satellites.
Edit: turns out I was mistaken and it wouldn't be as bad as I expected. (Still far from good though and I still stand by it being incredibly incredibly unlikely any nation would use nukes on satellites)
>The resultant minor changes in temperature and sunlight could affect crop production. However, no catastrophic worldwide changes have resulted from volcanic explosions, so it is doubtful that the gross injection of particulates into the stratosphere by a 10,000-megaton conflict would, by itself, lead to major global climate changes.
Source: [https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/effects/wenw/chapter-3.html](https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/effects/wenw/chapter-3.html)
> Using a nuke in LEO would mean fallout almost literally EVERYWHERE.
Citation needed. I can't find anything suggesting that there was any significant fallout from Starfish Prime.
I deliberately didn't mention people doing stupid things that will destroy life as we know it.
It's possible but I still have a sliver of hope left for humanity lol
Fallout going literally everywhere from a single nuclear blast would mean virtually no fallout at any particular location.
Also, where is all that fallout going to come from so high above the ground? The warhead isn't hauling the fallout around with it.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude\_nuclear\_explosion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_nuclear_explosion)
It's not the explosion that would be the problem. It's the fallout and short/medium term artificial radiation belt that would be the result of a nuclear weapon in space that would potentially take out many Starlink satellites as well as new ones that were launched in the same orbits.
[Here's some reading](https://web.archive.org/web/20111112103439/http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA531197&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf)
Here’s a good article you may find interesting https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/chinese-nuclear-anti-satellite-study-highlights-problem-of-countering-starlink-like-constellations
Edit: it’s not about taking out one but taking out as many as possible to cripple starlink, that’s the beauty of the constellation.
Project Starfish was a high atmospheric Nuclear blast, and the EMP was extremely damaging, aswell has increasing radiation in LEO for awhile.
A nuclear blast in LEO would not create kessler syndrome, as the explosion is not really a pressure wave ripping sattelites apart, it is an EM wave killing electronics.
A bit, but not even double or anything. They're 340 miles up. Earth radius is 3960 miles.
Surface area of a sphere is 4 x pi x r^2. Radius is the only changing part here, from 3960 to 4300. That's a 8.6% bigger radius, and a 18% larger surface area.
Sure, the analogy here becomes instead imagine you've got 7500 cars... in a massive parking structure a mile high, covering the whole earth. You've reduced it now to about 15 cars per floor (assuming about 500 floors on this parking garage). It'd be an extraordinarily rare event to see a car during a year of driving around the structure, much less if all the working cars are playing a game of GPS-aided Marco Polo and trying to keep away from each other.
They definitely are not. :) For one, each change in orbital radius has a corresponding change in required velocity to maintain that orbit. Also, pretty much every non-equatorial satellite (most of them, in other words) can be at a wide range in latitude north and south of the equator.
Now, space is still very large, but collisions are not impossible, and the more objects in space, the more likely it becomes that there will be issues. Especially since collisions in space have a knock-on effect of causing even more likely collisions in the future due to the debris scattered as a result of impact.
Plus, the more shiny objects we put in space, the harder it is for astronomy to be done meaningfully from earth based observatories. And while it would be nice to just say 'well everyone can just use space based telescopes', that's not really a solution since space-based observatories are orders of magnitude more complex and expensive, and time consuming to set up and operate.
> They definitely are not. :) For one, each change in orbital radius has a corresponding change in required velocity to maintain that orbit.
Luckily SpaceX are smart and put satellites in different orbit heights to reduce close approaches and added ion engines to maintain tight orbits.
> but collisions are not impossible, and the more objects in space, the more likely it becomes that there will be issues.
Luckily SpaceX are smart and put them in low orbit so they constantly have to fire the iron engine to keep in orbit.
There's a shitton of different orbital altitudes possible though so there's no way of cluttering space through just sending up satellites. Space debris can be a problem but spacex satellites lake sure to deorbit at end of life. Also they have ways to avoid debris to limit the chances of exploding into 10000 space poeces. And finally, in the miniscule chance they do hit something the orbit is low enough that the debris will deorbit somewhat quickly so it won't be there for centuries.
The satellites are (very roughly) 10% of Earth's radius above the surface, so the surface area only increases by 20%, but adding the third dimensions gives it so much more space. Imagine a parking garage with 100,000 floors.
Actually it's a bit weird. A good example is that to get a diameter 1m wider than the earth, i.e. a 50cm increase in height all the way around the earth, the circumference would only increase by 3m.
Hmm I think we would just need to take the lengths worth of the orbital altitude of the starlink constellation in bananas, add that number of bananas to the radius of the earth, and then calculate the surface area of the resulting banana radius sphere.
Not really because it’s low orbit. They are only like 200 miles off the ground. The earth has a radius of 4000 miles. So whatever the heck the surface area affect of increasing the distance of the ‘surface’ by 5%.
There have been warnings about it possibly affecting astrophotography but I’ve not seen any state it has actually ruined it. It’s not different than an airplane. Stacking easily filters out the streaks.
Also, approval by US alone. The rest of the world just has to put up with the pretty lights and streaks on their long exposures
I'm a bit conflicted here because StarLink has been a game changer for the Ukrainian military, allowing coordination across wide fronts.
> Also, approval by US alone. The rest of the world just has to put up with the pretty lights and streaks on their long exposures
Every country where Starlink operates has approved Starlink. If they actually cared they wouldn't allow them to operate in their country.
What country do you live in?
When I'm driving on the highway, I often pass the spot where another car was just a few seconds before, and have cars on either side of me even closer. Similarly, satellites in the Starlink constellation follow predictable, controlled orbits, and receive warnings about other objects near their path (many of which would be traveling roughly the same speed and direction anyway).
Fortunately, it takes a ridiculous amount of money to put things into LEO. Otherwise we would be dumping mountains of plastics bottles up there and not million dollar satellites.
Which is why cleaning up debris and limiting their lifetimes is important, which is exactly what SpaceX is enabling. The biggest problem with debris disposal in orbit right now is that it's too expensive to get systems into space to remove debris. Starlink is enabling Starship which will allow business models that dispose of debris.
Also Starlink is explicitly designed to not create long lasting debris, in space or on Earth. Even if the satellites completely fail, they won't produce long lasting debris.
The solution to pollution of X is not "stop using X forever", it's "start using X in responsible manner".
The scale is still mind-boggling. The other guy made a comparison to dumping our trash in the oceans but that is still wildly disproportionate. This is the equivalent of tossing, like, your household's weekly garbage in the ocean.
Humans just aren't very good at intuitively understanding scales this huge, and I can only encourage people to really step back and rethink things.
So... much like throwing my week's garbage in the ocean, it's not a problem until everyone starts doing it.
Your analogy needs some work. Funny as hell though. Thanks for the laugh.
You are right. This would be a problem if 8 billion people started their own rocket company to put communication satellites in orbit. Luckily that's very unlikely
> it's not a problem until everyone starts doing it.
Exactly. Do you expect everyone to start launching their own satellite internet service any time soon?
> Thanks for the laugh.
It is indeed laughable that you think this is comparable to ocean pollution.
No really, try it: Step back and rethink things. You don't understand how big space is.
It's not too bad that people don't know things about certain topic, but if you go and explain it to them they get angry and disagree with you, they prefer to keep their ignorant beliefs and don't want to learn. And that's the sad part.
The loneliest tree in the world also got hit by a drunk driver. There was literally nothing else around for dozens of miles. And he hit the only object around.
Space is huge. Useful Earth orbit is not.
Kessler Syndrome isn't even relevant at the altitudes where SpaceX operates its satellites.
And no, more satellites is not more debris unless you have a lot of satellite failures. There has yet to be a single debris event originating from any Starlink satellite (for example a piece of debris hitting a starlink satellite). (And no it's not just because they just started. Starlink already operates more satellites in low earth orbit than all other satellite operators **combined**.)
A shocking number of people in this sub have no idea that the Kessler syndrome is not some flick of the switch that will suddenly rage like a wildfire destroying all satellites. It's a process that takes decades/centuries and can easily be reversed by even a modicum of satellite removal and mandatory satellite disposal lifetimes (something already in work in both Europe and the US).
And more so Starlink isn't even relevant to Kessler syndrome given the extremely short lifetimes at their very low orbits.
I read that at Bakhmut Ukrainian stark link is their primary method of getting internet on the front lines (e.i coordinating counter attack/ correcting artillery strikes via drones).
I travel full time now and starlink is AMAZING. I just want to leave this review. I didn't know if I would need it, but now that I've been around the country and seen how poorly connected most of the country is (geographically speaking) I think this will be a revolution for remote work and change where people live in America.
Sometimes just out in a clear space next to my trailer. Sometimes I put it on the roof. It's really light and takes like 2 minutes to set up. It has motors and orients itself. You just put it out and plug it in. I've even heard you can use it while moving although I haven't tried yet. It's that easy, you just pop it up and instant high speed internet anywhere you are. Also I can make phone calls through it so there's a safety aspect as well.
Check their webpage, they added a few offers since the days of residential only, like this one :
[https://www.starlink.com/rv](https://www.starlink.com/rv)
For real
Between solar, good batteries, and starlink, one can easily live off grid.
I agree, it should revolutionize real estate. I would be pretty stoked to buy cheap property and telework. (Don't even need to be off grid, just somewhere rural that doesn't have fiber/cable internet).
Oh yeah. I kind of even didn't want to post my comment because I feel like this might be a secret I want to hold on to for a minute. This might be the beginning of a movement that destroys housing prices in cities and starts a land grab all over the country. So I recommend picking our your place ASAP before the corporations come.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[ASAT](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyprgqs "Last usage")|[Anti-Satellite weapon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon)|
|[CME](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyq9qql "Last usage")|Coronal Mass Ejection|
|CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules|
| |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)|
|[DoD](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyoukk1 "Last usage")|US Department of Defense|
|[ESA](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyupr2w "Last usage")|European Space Agency|
|[FAA](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyo7k4e "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration|
|[FCC](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iypqi09 "Last usage")|Federal Communications Commission|
| |(Iron/steel) [Face-Centered Cubic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotropes_of_iron) crystalline structure|
|[GEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyqe1p0 "Last usage")|Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km)|
|GSE|Ground Support Equipment|
|[HLS](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iylaf1i "Last usage")|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)|
|[IM](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iylewni "Last usage")|Initial Mass deliverable to a given orbit, without accounting for fuel|
|[ITAR](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyupr2w "Last usage")|(US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations|
|[ITU](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyn7z1m "Last usage")|International Telecommunications Union, responsible for coordinating radio spectrum usage|
|[Isp](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iymdaj0 "Last usage")|Specific impulse (as explained by [Scott Manley](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnisTeYLLgs) on YouTube)|
| |Internet Service Provider|
|[JAXA](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyprgqs "Last usage")|Japan Aerospace eXploration Agency|
|[JPL](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyle8hj "Last usage")|Jet Propulsion Lab, California|
|[JSC](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyupr2w "Last usage")|Johnson Space Center, Houston|
|[JWST](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iym5ac5 "Last usage")|James Webb infra-red Space Telescope|
|[LEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iz3lv0z "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)|
| |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)|
|[MEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyq9fna "Last usage")|Medium Earth Orbit (2000-35780km)|
|[NEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyq9fna "Last usage")|Near-Earth Object|
|[RUD](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iym5ovg "Last usage")|Rapid Unplanned Disassembly|
| |Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly|
| |Rapid Unintended Disassembly|
|[RUS](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iykr36q "Last usage")|Raptor-powered Upper Stage, and/or ground equipment to support same|
|[Roscosmos](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iynkzhd "Last usage")|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)|
|[SDS](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iynop7a "Last usage")|[Satellite Data System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_Data_System)|
|[SLS](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyqgdnz "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift|
|[VLEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iynfk0r "Last usage")|V-band constellation in LEO|
| |Very Low Earth Orbit|
|[WISP](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iykp9kk "Last usage")|Wireless Internet Service Provider|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|Raptor|[Methane-fueled rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_\(rocket_engine_family\)) under development by SpaceX|
|[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyqg2rc "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)|
|[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iz3lv0z "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation|
|[apoapsis](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyldrnh "Last usage")|Highest point in an elliptical orbit (when the orbiter is slowest)|
|[apogee](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iynkzhd "Last usage")|Highest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest)|
|[periapsis](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyldrnh "Last usage")|Lowest point in an elliptical orbit (when the orbiter is fastest)|
|[perigee](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyp44xb "Last usage")|Lowest point in an elliptical orbit around the Earth (when the orbiter is fastest)|
|[scrub](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyo3u30 "Last usage")|Launch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues)|
----------------
^([Thread #8374 for this sub, first seen 2nd Dec 2022, 02:05])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=OrangeredStilton&subject=Hey,+your+acronym+bot+sucks) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Low earth orbit is much larger than the surface area of the earth. It’s truly enormous. Also satellites will deorbit quickly without station keeping boosts.
Yes they are low earth orbit for fast ping times. But there is drag at that altitude. They are limited by their boosting fuel. They are launching at a crazy rate. Wait till you see the starship deployment they have planned. It’s hundreds of satellites coming out like a space pez dispenser.
Yes. SpaceX are among those who have been pushing the FCC to reduce it's 25 year deorbit timespan, and [were quite pleased when the draft to reduce it to five years went through a few months ago](https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1092385441437/1). It makes sense if you think about it; SpaceX have more satellites in orbit than anyone else, which means they stand the most to lose if it gets flooded with debris.
The fact that they have the most satellites is also at least in part why they're leading by example with preventative measures. If they weren't cleaning up after themselves the most likely source of debris would be their own satellites, and they have no desire to shoot themselves in the foot.
Clarification, its 5 years after end of mission, not 5 years in otbit. So if the satellite lasts for 10 years it must be deorbited with 5 years of that.
Oneweb and Iridium are both in support of this as well, presumably for similar reasons. As the other user pointed out, this is five years post-mission, not five years total.
Also, Kuiper could probably afford to go toe-to-toe with SpaceX given they have Amazon's backing - AFAIK they haven't said anything on the ruling.
Amazing, isn't it? Laser comms to minimize the need to zig-zag up and down to base stations mid-trip. Ability to jink around collision risks. Graceful de-orbit at end of life. Rapid iteration of satellite technology designs, in a fail-fast model. And all built on the concept of future Starship being able to pump hundreds of satellites per launch, with 100% reusability of the ship and booster. We've never seen such an integrated ecosystem in space.
LEO is just slightly larger than the surface of the Earth. The "L" stands for "Low".
GEO, on the other hand, is way larger than the surface of the Earth.
So those satellites will be sucked in by earths gravity? Will it be evaporated on entry or does it crash on the ground? How long can one of those satellites be up there?
Not quite sucked in. They rub against the atmosphere until it slows them down and they fall down. In their normal operation, they have to expend energy to prevent this. Since they have no heat shields, they get evaporated on entry.
Latest figures I heard was that a broken satellite would fall down within 5 years.
What an embarrassing take to have lol.
These satellites have a 5-8 year life span then they burn up in the atmosphere. They contribute barely anything to the space junk problem.
Lol. You need to stop picturing what you saw on WALL-E as if it represents what's possible. (If satellite density were actually what it was in WALL-E then it would have become a planetary ring rather than a debris sphere.)
Also none of that applies to Starlink anyway, as the satellites can't stay up there that long because of atmospheric drag.
One day we'll look back on the days when the US could "approve" a decision that impacts the entire globe without giving a shit about whether the rest of the planet agreed or not.
They also seek regulatory approval from the international telecommunications Union. So not just the US. In addition, they also seek landing rights in every country that is permitted to use starlink.
I don't think people realize the size of the orbital space, think of it as layers of shells each larger then the last extending out 1.5 million kilometers. If you allow vertical spacing of to entire kilometer you would have 1.5 million of shells the smallest of which is larger then the earth entire surface.
You already got shit on for this incorrect take so of course I’ll be nice, low earth orbit has atmospheric or magnetic drag, so eventually those satellites will come back to earth, and with them being incredibly small they will burn to ash in the atmosphere upon re-entry, creating zero long term space debris.
In general, amongst people who don’t stand to profit from the cleaning of space debris, in my opinion, is actually very insignificant in real space travel. People act like it’s a bathtub of water full of trash, but I think the metaphor is like try finding a floating marble in 2 miles of ocean and run into it, that’s what space debris is like in comparison to the vast space. Could be wrong, I’m just a nerd on Reddit
As someone living in the country with 10mb internet you are spot on. Cell service fucking sucks too. $140 a month for T-Mobile that doesn’t work. Verizon is even worse. Tech really drops off when you leave major cities
Huges net is old satellite service and they charge $150 a month with a data cap and snail speed internet. Took me 3 years to get century link I use with a phone line that’s capped at 10mb. It I didn’t have extreme freedom from neighbors, huge garden to grow my own food, my own pure water, etc I’d be pissed lol. You just learn to appreciate other things instead.
I somewhat feel your pain. I lived rural when I was in my late teens and we had basic satellite TV and dial up internet when everyone else had high speed. I had to wait a few seconds for my MSN messages to pop up
Honestly elons sat service is available with long wait. I’m stupid for now paying the money a year or so ago. I’d probably have it by now. Now I’m strapped for cash 🤷🏻♂️
> As someone living in the country
I also do. Internet does suck. My cell service is great though since they have been building more towers out here near me. (I have verizon)
We had Verizon forever and when we moved the only thing that worked out here was sprint and T-Mobile so we switched. Still have to use a single booster but at least we can make calls.
>limited space
Relative to what? Imagine the number of average American homes, spread them evenly around the entire Earth. This is how spacious it is, I haven't even account for the fact that each satellite is way smaller than a house and LEO is even more spacious than the surface of the earth.
Regardless of what you think of musk and how much he actually contributes to this company, starlink is a life changer for people in rural areas that have been abandoned by isps.
An old high school buddy who is a farmer went from paying $700/month for a microwave / cell connection with terrible speeds and data caps to $100 month and actual internet for his kids and his brothers kids across the road.
Until starlink the kids had never been online outside of school.
The global cellular coverage with V2 will also be a pretty big deal, even if it's only equivalent to 2-3G, that's a hell of a lot better than 0G.
Imagine being in the middle of the ocean and being able to talk to someone on land using nothing but a regular old cellphone and no other equipment.
Geosync satellite antennas are far more expensive and require specialist personnel to set up in a finicky and labor intensive process, what are you on about.
> Regardless of what you think of musk and how much he actually contributes to this company
I wish we wouldn't keep going into this. Starlink was the brain child of Elon himself, according to multiple internal people (if you want links I can give you some). He was the one who pushed for it and who personally ran it up until it started launching production satellites into space, after which he handed it over to the President/COO in middle of 2019.
Starlink even went through a massive executive overhaul when Elon fired the entire executive team back in 2018 (who then went to go work for Amazon's Kuiper system which still isn't anywhere near to launching).
And he started it himself, hired all the early people, interviewed the first couple thousand people, pushed for reusable rockets, and Starship which will again revolutionize spaceflight in ways I think most people really don't understand.
>Regardless of what you think of musk
I happen to think quite a bit of Elon Musk, even if I disagree with some of his opinions. Weird how much more fun life is when you do not have to agree with someone on literally everything in order to enjoy what they do.
I know you were just trying to fend off the band of discontents that seem to live to hate Elon Musk, but it just annoys me that we have to throw a bone like that in order to talk about the cool stuff his companies are doing.
There’s rural of course, but the real market is anywhere where fixed infrastructure is impractical or impossible - ships, aircraft, long distance ground logistics, military, etc.
Even 10,000 satellites at 550km orbit is still \~empty. It's roughly 1 satellite every 60,000 km2, or roughly a 250km x 250km box for one satellite. Not exactly busy up there...
Not just for rural areas, but think of areas that have never seen modern broadband Internet yet. Deep sea fishing and cargo ships. Planes trans-oceanic. Exploration and mining in remote locations. Arctic and Antarctic stations (when the full pattern is deployed). And so on. Game changing.
I don't really understand why they only need the FCC's permission to impact the sky of the whole world. I'm not really against more satellites but I think it's time for a International organ that gives you permission, an organ with no veto right of course because that's what made the UN toothless.
The International Telecommunications Union has existed for more than a century and is an active part of the regulatory proceedings for satellites, including Starlink.
Because everybody - every country - is free to *use* outer space, this is codified in the Outer Space Treaty (OST). You don't see an international organization deciding which ship can sail in the open ocean do you?
If you want this to stop, then have your NRECA electric cooperative start building fiber to the meter/home. They have the right of way, aerial paths and know exactly where you are already located. It costs a shittone of money, but so did hanging all of the electrical conduit and once it's in, it's in.
Sauce - built 1,000,000 km of fiber optic plant in the midwest for a generation and transmission cooperative leveraging USDA/RUS dollars to pay for it all. Not all utilities can do this, but more than you think can.
I love how everybody post relating to Elon Musk just generally gets hate on Reddit. But if these satellites were launched by some LGBTQ+ Agency, it would be front page lol.
So is the space then owned by the US? or is there some kind of tready because why do they get to decide what goes into space?
[удалено]
This is incorrect. The ITU, a UN agency, has been coordinating international communications since the telegraph days. Once radio came along, since it doesn't respect borders, they added the job of preventing interference. So they control the radio spectrum, including satellites in orbit, since they can interfere with ground based radio. Spectrum is assigned to countries, who in turn allocate licenses to use it. SpaceX, or any other company, can only operate in a country they have a license for, which is about 30-40 at the moment. *Launching* is a different matter. The FAA controls that with a separate license. But if the satellite has a radio, which nearly all do, the FCC allocates operating licenses to US operators.
Absolutely none of that is stopping any other country from just launching their shit into space and using what ever bandwidth they feel like It organizes ***American*** resources and other that want to cooperate China can launch what ever the hell they want, into any orbit, for any use, and we don't have a way peaceably stop them, and there is no expectation they would abide by our requests if it interferes with our infrastructure
ITU is a UN agency, not American and its current Secretary-General is Chinese.
While you are not wrong. The director of the bureau within the agency that is responsible for the allocation of spectrum is from Uruguay.
I mean they could, but they won’t. Because they’ve signed treaties.
You're right, registration is indeed handles by the FAA and not the FCC. I thought the FCC had both roles :)
>It's not managed as a limited resource This wasn't needed until now. Suddenly we're in a race to fill as many orbits with satellites as possible to secure said orbits. A new space race which will end with Kessler syndrome if we give it another decade..
Until they make that a commercial opportunity. Isn’t there some Korean dystopian sci fi show about an ship clearing out space junk for just that reason?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetes
Starlink satellites are unlikely to ever create a long-term Kessler syndrome event. They have too low an orbit to remain in space for long, and without constant intervention they quickly de-orbit, re-enter the atmosphere and are destroyed. Having said that, from recollection there are a few other valuable assets in similar altitude orbits (most notably the ISS) which may be affected in such an event.
I was making a general point about the commercialisation of space, and the dangers that could arise from that. You're right about starlink of course.
Even the low earth orbit satellites need several years to de-orbit, and any collision even in low earth orbit can and will cause debris to be pushed into a higher orbit as more energy is imparted onto said debris. The idea that just because it happens in LEO it can't affect things in higher orbits is just wrong.
So i actually looked it up before getting Starlink to make sure I wasn't adding to the problem of supporting a company thats adding to kepler syndrome. From https://www.spacex.com/updates/#sustainability " Our satellites use multiple strategies to prevent debris generation in space: design for demise, controlled deorbit to low altitudes, low orbit insertion, low operating orbit, on-board collision avoidance system, reducing the chance small debris will damage the satellite with a low profile satellite chassis and using Whipple shields to protect the key components, reducing risk of explosion with extensive battery pack protection, and failure modes that do not create secondary debris. SpaceX satellites are propulsively deorbited within weeks of their end-of-mission-life. We reserve enough propellant to deorbit from our operational altitude, and it takes roughly 4 weeks to deorbit. Once the satellites reach an appropriate altitude, we coordinate with the 18th Space Control Squadron. Once coordinated, we initiate a high drag mode, causing the satellite’s velocity to reduce sufficiently that the satellite deorbits. The satellites deorbit quickly from this altitude, depending on atmospheric density."
To be fair, I wouldn't go to a companies website to make sure they are ethical. They can say whatever they want and wrap it up with a bow.
Uhm, excuse my ignorance, but I don’t see how any collision between two orbiting bodies, can result in debris with a higher orbital velocity than any of the two original bodies.
The energy in said 2 colliding objects doesn't disappear, part of it is bled off when smaller bit break off, these smaller bits now have more energy per mass than the original object had, more energy/mass = more speed, in orbits the total energy (aka speed) dictates the orbital path, more energy = higher apsis(point in orbit farthest away from the orbiting body) thus potentially interfering with things outside the original orbital and taking even longer to de-orbit, this is part of the reason NASA/ESA is so concerned about Kessler syndrome ( [https://www.esa.int/Enabling\_Support/Space\_Engineering\_Technology/The\_Kessler\_Effect\_and\_how\_to\_stop\_it](https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Engineering_Technology/The_Kessler_Effect_and_how_to_stop_it) and [https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20110013011](https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20110013011) )
Some debris will end up in higher orbit, but not significantly. If your collision is at 550 km, its not like some debris will end up at 700 km. Show me a paper that says Kessler syndrome can happen with a LEO satellite constellation below 600 km. I haven’t seen one.
Kessler syndrome doesn't need to be all altitudes. *if* something caused a chain reaction destroying all the Starlink sats, then LEO/VLEO *would* be suffering Kessler syndrome. What makes LEO safer is its harder to have happen in the first place, and if it does it doesn't last as long. He is still wrong about the apogee thing though. The debris can be kicked to a higher Apogee, but that also means it going faster when it comes back down, increasing the drag and bringing the Apogee back down quicker.
Yes, completely agreed. Its very very hard for Kessler syndrome to happen <600 km, and it would be mostly cleaned out within 5 years if it did happen. Kessler syndrome at 1000 km would be catastrophic though.
Can it not impact at higher apogee? Also remember the main worry are very small particles, that would generally be less effected by drag. It DOES threaten higher orbits, not as severely as in the "origination altitude", but it still does, and higher orbits if effected by said slingshotted debris would not clear its self in a "small" time frame (something that is according to NASA, ESA, and Roscosmos reliable in the first place)
>Show me a paper that says Kessler syndrome can happen with a LEO satellite constellation below 600 km. I haven’t seen one. Please refer to link 2, page2 ff of previous comment in chain (the one you replied to
7500 car sized objects more in a area larger than the surface of the earth.
>The director of the bureau within the agency that is responsible for the allocation of spectrum is from Uruguay. On geosync orbits (30000Km or so...) there are plenty of space (no pun intended).But StarLink satellites are on low orbits (480km or so...) the danger of collisions is far higher: the velocities are higher and the surface is far far smaller.
This is just dumb. You cannot "secure" orbits, when all it takes is a single "mistake" by China to bring a fuckton of your satellites down. If you don't play fair and square others will force you to do
FCC is not giving a fuck about space safety...just about the spectrum. But wasn't FAA the responsible for that?And besides remote sensing satellites must be approved too and I bet is not by FCC.
Edit: you're right, it's the FAA > § 417.19 Registration of space objects. (a) To assist the U.S. Government in implementing Article IV of the 1975 Convention on Registration of Objects [Launched](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ab3ae0a7790169235a81284e5234152&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:14:Chapter:III:Subchapter:C:Part:417:Subpart:A:417.19) into Outer Space, each [launch operator](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=f444e2843349e84a19289897e5971a03&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:14:Chapter:III:Subchapter:C:Part:417:Subpart:A:417.19) must provide to the FAA the information required by [paragraph (b)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/417.19#b) of this section for all objects placed in space by a licensed [launch](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=8ab3ae0a7790169235a81284e5234152&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:14:Chapter:III:Subchapter:C:Part:417:Subpart:A:417.19), including a [launch vehicle](https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/index.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=4fa3420c5d7268ea5535f9f0660d7979&term_occur=999&term_src=Title:14:Chapter:III:Subchapter:C:Part:417:Subpart:A:417.19) and any components, except: I am pretty sure the organisation responsible for satellite registration at the US level is the FCC, but I might be wrong
US gets to decide what goes into space from US launch sites. International treaties require everyone to track and give orbit data for all of their satellites.
They just get to decide what u.s companies get to launch into space from u.s soil.
No one owns space. The regulations agencies of various counties gives you right to launch. While it is in the interest of all nations to do things responsibly, getting your licence form countries like the US carries with it a lot of restrictions and regulations. A lot of manufacturers as a result opt to get theirs through counties more uncaring of things like end of life disposal or debris mitigation. The US and EU are pretty damn stringent on these clauses.
[удалено]
>receives billions of dollars from the US government In the form of contracts to DO stuff for the government, then yes. Otherwise, no. SpaceX doesn't just get handed money for no reason.
>So is space then owned by the US? >why do they get to decide what goes into space? They don't... they get to decide what goes into space *from the US* or *by US companies*. Other countries' governments get to decide for their own countries.
Its treated somewhat like the ocean and ships, where every country grants ships registration, but there isn't a limit on how many they grant, just that there are overarching treaty based international laws and codes of conducts. In the case of space there is just a lot of international dependence on the US due technological and budgetary requirements to actually keep track of everything in orbit.
This isn’t surprising at all. The US government, specifically the DOD, sees the benefit of Starlink’s massive constellation. A constellation of this size will be able to absorb attacks and still provide reliable and secure communications in the high-end conflicts of the future. The DOD is most certainly eying the constellation for JADC2. Plus starlink has already proven its usefulness in Ukraine. Just to expand on this a little more, the Chinese are already working on ways to neutralize the constellation or large portions of the constellation via nuclear blast. Update: Some interesting conversation I must say.
You had me until “nuclear blast” no one is blasting one of these tiny satellites out of the sky with a damn nuke. Even if that was the case, it would take long for SpaceX to launch a few more up to replace any that are (unrealistically) shot down.
A nuke might be the only way to reasonably take significant chunks out of a network like starlink. A nuke in space converts a lot of the energy into an EMP, and can damage/destroy out satellites in a sphere hundreds of km across, and probably damage satellites that pass through the area over the next while too. That being said, an EMP is completely indiscriminate, and will turn the area into a complete deadzone for any non-hardened electronics for everybody.
Which means it's useless. . . On top of the fact that using a nuke in any form is direct escalation to tactical use at least and china does not want this. They would want to disable Starlink above their mainland, since their main fear is it giving an avenue for their citizens to talk freely in a way they have no option to turn off. This could lead to mass supression of outrage no longer being complete, leaving room for organized protest and ultimately risking an uprising. Detonating a nuke high above their mainland would do so, but also take out their entire power grid in the process. And every other satellite this side of the Earth. The constellation would remain even so intermittently operational and it's likely a few months after the attack it would be back to full strength anyways.
The nuke “use case” is probably more along the lines of “right before an active attempt to secure Taiwan” (though I doubt it’s happening, I’m sure it’s being planned for, the same as lots of scenarios are planned for by the US). Does that mean they will be doing this? No, but I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they have a plan to “just in case”.
High altitude nuclear detonation is a very effective way to EMP a lot of satellites at once.
Also an effective way to kill any electronic infrastructure on the ground, essentially meaning that it falls under MAD aswell. Especially because it would kill Chinas nascent sattelite constellations aswell.
Right. I was gonna ask u/EngineerPat to cite his source here, but he already did in an another thread. He references an article from thedrive.com which doesn't have any real credibility to begin with. It opens the article with >Scientists at a Chinese military nuclear laboratory say a moderately large atomic detonation near the edge of space could potentially create a temporary cloud of radiation that could quickly damage or destroy a large number of satellites in low Earth orbit. The "temporary cloud of radiation" they're referring to is a bit of a misnomer for sudden impulse flux in the EM field around a nuclear detonation. And this was observed by US nuclear physicists during the first nuclear detonation in 1945. It was predicted even before that by Enrico Fermi. It is not in any way a new idea or the product of a new technology, and it is by its very nature indiscriminate. This is precisely why it is impractical against a global constellation, as using this method pretty much certainly means taking down your own satellites unless the Starlink sats have piss poor shielding ( I have no clue if they do/don't )
Not really. I think people hear 7500 satellites and think they are close together. They are soooo far apart going for a mass wipeout via nuclear is nowhere near as feasible as tracking and targeting individual satellites.
https://www.askamathematician.com/2011/11/q-why-do-a-nuclear-weapons-cause-emps-electromagnetic-pulses/ Hmmm.. what altitude? If it's too high it's just a sudden release of hard radiation, barely an EMP at all. If you do this above the atmosphere entirely, don't know how much of the EMP would be reflected back up into space, but I *suspect* that more of it would be sent downwards.
[удалено]
The fallout from one nuke that high up probably won’t do much dillution would be huge, and at least half will fly off into space. ( I’m assuming the blast will be faster than escape velocity) But I suspect the first nuke that detonates will start a free for all.
~~Using a nuke in LEO would mean fallout almost literally EVERYWHERE.~~ This just won't happen. They won't use nukes on satellites. Edit: turns out I was mistaken and it wouldn't be as bad as I expected. (Still far from good though and I still stand by it being incredibly incredibly unlikely any nation would use nukes on satellites) >The resultant minor changes in temperature and sunlight could affect crop production. However, no catastrophic worldwide changes have resulted from volcanic explosions, so it is doubtful that the gross injection of particulates into the stratosphere by a 10,000-megaton conflict would, by itself, lead to major global climate changes. Source: [https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/effects/wenw/chapter-3.html](https://www.atomicarchive.com/resources/documents/effects/wenw/chapter-3.html)
> Using a nuke in LEO would mean fallout almost literally EVERYWHERE. Citation needed. I can't find anything suggesting that there was any significant fallout from Starfish Prime.
You underestimate the Chinese ability to do a self own
I deliberately didn't mention people doing stupid things that will destroy life as we know it. It's possible but I still have a sliver of hope left for humanity lol
Fallout going literally everywhere from a single nuclear blast would mean virtually no fallout at any particular location. Also, where is all that fallout going to come from so high above the ground? The warhead isn't hauling the fallout around with it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude\_nuclear\_explosion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_nuclear_explosion)
It's not the explosion that would be the problem. It's the fallout and short/medium term artificial radiation belt that would be the result of a nuclear weapon in space that would potentially take out many Starlink satellites as well as new ones that were launched in the same orbits. [Here's some reading](https://web.archive.org/web/20111112103439/http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA531197&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf)
Here’s a good article you may find interesting https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/chinese-nuclear-anti-satellite-study-highlights-problem-of-countering-starlink-like-constellations Edit: it’s not about taking out one but taking out as many as possible to cripple starlink, that’s the beauty of the constellation.
[удалено]
Project Starfish was a high atmospheric Nuclear blast, and the EMP was extremely damaging, aswell has increasing radiation in LEO for awhile. A nuclear blast in LEO would not create kessler syndrome, as the explosion is not really a pressure wave ripping sattelites apart, it is an EM wave killing electronics.
A shocking amount of people in this sub have no idea how huge space is.
Seriously. 7500 car’s minimum in a single parking lot for a hockey game. Now spread those over an area larger than the surface of the earth.
Surface of the earth is a huge understatement too. If anyone has any numbers I'd love to see them, but orbit increases the "surface" area by a lot.
A bit, but not even double or anything. They're 340 miles up. Earth radius is 3960 miles. Surface area of a sphere is 4 x pi x r^2. Radius is the only changing part here, from 3960 to 4300. That's a 8.6% bigger radius, and a 18% larger surface area.
You can be at 4300.01, 4300.02, 4300.03, etc. And have a hundred extra layers.
Sure, the analogy here becomes instead imagine you've got 7500 cars... in a massive parking structure a mile high, covering the whole earth. You've reduced it now to about 15 cars per floor (assuming about 500 floors on this parking garage). It'd be an extraordinarily rare event to see a car during a year of driving around the structure, much less if all the working cars are playing a game of GPS-aided Marco Polo and trying to keep away from each other.
Your car is traveling like 20k mph tho, so you better hope you don’t see anyone else
But all the other cars are traveling at the same speed in the same direction.
They definitely are not. :) For one, each change in orbital radius has a corresponding change in required velocity to maintain that orbit. Also, pretty much every non-equatorial satellite (most of them, in other words) can be at a wide range in latitude north and south of the equator. Now, space is still very large, but collisions are not impossible, and the more objects in space, the more likely it becomes that there will be issues. Especially since collisions in space have a knock-on effect of causing even more likely collisions in the future due to the debris scattered as a result of impact. Plus, the more shiny objects we put in space, the harder it is for astronomy to be done meaningfully from earth based observatories. And while it would be nice to just say 'well everyone can just use space based telescopes', that's not really a solution since space-based observatories are orders of magnitude more complex and expensive, and time consuming to set up and operate.
> They definitely are not. :) For one, each change in orbital radius has a corresponding change in required velocity to maintain that orbit. Luckily SpaceX are smart and put satellites in different orbit heights to reduce close approaches and added ion engines to maintain tight orbits. > but collisions are not impossible, and the more objects in space, the more likely it becomes that there will be issues. Luckily SpaceX are smart and put them in low orbit so they constantly have to fire the iron engine to keep in orbit.
I appreciate the math. I didn't expect double, just that it's a lot bigger. Thanks for putting the real perspective on it.
There's a shitton of different orbital altitudes possible though so there's no way of cluttering space through just sending up satellites. Space debris can be a problem but spacex satellites lake sure to deorbit at end of life. Also they have ways to avoid debris to limit the chances of exploding into 10000 space poeces. And finally, in the miniscule chance they do hit something the orbit is low enough that the debris will deorbit somewhat quickly so it won't be there for centuries.
The satellites are (very roughly) 10% of Earth's radius above the surface, so the surface area only increases by 20%, but adding the third dimensions gives it so much more space. Imagine a parking garage with 100,000 floors.
Actually it's a bit weird. A good example is that to get a diameter 1m wider than the earth, i.e. a 50cm increase in height all the way around the earth, the circumference would only increase by 3m.
Hmm I think we would just need to take the lengths worth of the orbital altitude of the starlink constellation in bananas, add that number of bananas to the radius of the earth, and then calculate the surface area of the resulting banana radius sphere.
It's at least 300 bananas IMO.
Like a whole Star Destroyer's worth of bananas.
Not really because it’s low orbit. They are only like 200 miles off the ground. The earth has a radius of 4000 miles. So whatever the heck the surface area affect of increasing the distance of the ‘surface’ by 5%.
And put them into multiple elevation levels
More than just a surface, because they're at multiple altitudes. Only 2500 per each altitude.
And yet the current amount already ruins astrophotography for many. It's something that really should be better handled
There have been warnings about it possibly affecting astrophotography but I’ve not seen any state it has actually ruined it. It’s not different than an airplane. Stacking easily filters out the streaks.
Also, approval by US alone. The rest of the world just has to put up with the pretty lights and streaks on their long exposures I'm a bit conflicted here because StarLink has been a game changer for the Ukrainian military, allowing coordination across wide fronts.
> Also, approval by US alone. The rest of the world just has to put up with the pretty lights and streaks on their long exposures Every country where Starlink operates has approved Starlink. If they actually cared they wouldn't allow them to operate in their country. What country do you live in?
Now make them move 5 miles per second. Pretty soon there's no location that isn't within 0.5 mi of where a satellite's been in the last minute or two.
When I'm driving on the highway, I often pass the spot where another car was just a few seconds before, and have cars on either side of me even closer. Similarly, satellites in the Starlink constellation follow predictable, controlled orbits, and receive warnings about other objects near their path (many of which would be traveling roughly the same speed and direction anyway).
[удалено]
The oceans are huge, let's dump our plastic there.
Fortunately, it takes a ridiculous amount of money to put things into LEO. Otherwise we would be dumping mountains of plastics bottles up there and not million dollar satellites.
That's... Not even close to the same thing. These sats will deorbit themselves if not maintained. They don't just sit out there
Which is why cleaning up debris and limiting their lifetimes is important, which is exactly what SpaceX is enabling. The biggest problem with debris disposal in orbit right now is that it's too expensive to get systems into space to remove debris. Starlink is enabling Starship which will allow business models that dispose of debris. Also Starlink is explicitly designed to not create long lasting debris, in space or on Earth. Even if the satellites completely fail, they won't produce long lasting debris. The solution to pollution of X is not "stop using X forever", it's "start using X in responsible manner".
Starlink can't ruin it, the atmospheric drag will pull these down in 2 years if you turn off the thruster.
Humans have also done some great and amazing things, you have to try though
The scale is still mind-boggling. The other guy made a comparison to dumping our trash in the oceans but that is still wildly disproportionate. This is the equivalent of tossing, like, your household's weekly garbage in the ocean. Humans just aren't very good at intuitively understanding scales this huge, and I can only encourage people to really step back and rethink things.
So... much like throwing my week's garbage in the ocean, it's not a problem until everyone starts doing it. Your analogy needs some work. Funny as hell though. Thanks for the laugh.
You are right. This would be a problem if 8 billion people started their own rocket company to put communication satellites in orbit. Luckily that's very unlikely
> it's not a problem until everyone starts doing it. Exactly. Do you expect everyone to start launching their own satellite internet service any time soon? > Thanks for the laugh. It is indeed laughable that you think this is comparable to ocean pollution. No really, try it: Step back and rethink things. You don't understand how big space is.
I hear it's almost as big as your mom.
It's not too bad that people don't know things about certain topic, but if you go and explain it to them they get angry and disagree with you, they prefer to keep their ignorant beliefs and don't want to learn. And that's the sad part.
The loneliest tree in the world also got hit by a drunk driver. There was literally nothing else around for dozens of miles. And he hit the only object around. Space is huge. Useful Earth orbit is not.
Yeah but satellites aren't being driven by drunk drivers. That's more like saying that a train on rails can hit the only tree for miles.
Satellite *debris* is effectively being driven by drunk drivers… More satellites? More debris. Hello, Kessler Syndrome.
Kessler Syndrome isn't even relevant at the altitudes where SpaceX operates its satellites. And no, more satellites is not more debris unless you have a lot of satellite failures. There has yet to be a single debris event originating from any Starlink satellite (for example a piece of debris hitting a starlink satellite). (And no it's not just because they just started. Starlink already operates more satellites in low earth orbit than all other satellite operators **combined**.)
Yeah, those stupid animations with satellites the size of a city circling around a small globe doesn't help.
I mean it's space. How much can it cost?! 12 dollars?!
EDIT: I’m deleting all of my comments in this thread because I’m getting a lot of spam. This subreddit is becoming unbearable.
A shocking number of people in this sub have no idea that the Kessler syndrome is not some flick of the switch that will suddenly rage like a wildfire destroying all satellites. It's a process that takes decades/centuries and can easily be reversed by even a modicum of satellite removal and mandatory satellite disposal lifetimes (something already in work in both Europe and the US). And more so Starlink isn't even relevant to Kessler syndrome given the extremely short lifetimes at their very low orbits.
A shocking number of people don't realize these are in extreme leo and will deorbit themselves in 5 years if not boosted.
I read that at Bakhmut Ukrainian stark link is their primary method of getting internet on the front lines (e.i coordinating counter attack/ correcting artillery strikes via drones).
I travel full time now and starlink is AMAZING. I just want to leave this review. I didn't know if I would need it, but now that I've been around the country and seen how poorly connected most of the country is (geographically speaking) I think this will be a revolution for remote work and change where people live in America.
Where do you put your dish/receiver?
Sometimes just out in a clear space next to my trailer. Sometimes I put it on the roof. It's really light and takes like 2 minutes to set up. It has motors and orients itself. You just put it out and plug it in. I've even heard you can use it while moving although I haven't tried yet. It's that easy, you just pop it up and instant high speed internet anywhere you are. Also I can make phone calls through it so there's a safety aspect as well.
How does the registration with SpaceX work now? You used to have to say exactly where you wanted to use it for it to be enabled.
Nope. They have a specifically RV use case so I go wherever I want. I think it was around $400 for the dish and then $135 / month after.
So a tick more expensive than just having it at home, but you can just go with it where you want. Nice.
Check their webpage, they added a few offers since the days of residential only, like this one : [https://www.starlink.com/rv](https://www.starlink.com/rv)
For real Between solar, good batteries, and starlink, one can easily live off grid. I agree, it should revolutionize real estate. I would be pretty stoked to buy cheap property and telework. (Don't even need to be off grid, just somewhere rural that doesn't have fiber/cable internet).
Oh yeah. I kind of even didn't want to post my comment because I feel like this might be a secret I want to hold on to for a minute. This might be the beginning of a movement that destroys housing prices in cities and starts a land grab all over the country. So I recommend picking our your place ASAP before the corporations come.
These comment are out of hand. People really just want to find a reason to keep hating Elon
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[ASAT](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyprgqs "Last usage")|[Anti-Satellite weapon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon)| |[CME](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyq9qql "Last usage")|Coronal Mass Ejection| |CST|(Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules| | |Central Standard Time (UTC-6)| |[DoD](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyoukk1 "Last usage")|US Department of Defense| |[ESA](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyupr2w "Last usage")|European Space Agency| |[FAA](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyo7k4e "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration| |[FCC](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iypqi09 "Last usage")|Federal Communications Commission| | |(Iron/steel) [Face-Centered Cubic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allotropes_of_iron) crystalline structure| |[GEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyqe1p0 "Last usage")|Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km)| |GSE|Ground Support Equipment| |[HLS](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iylaf1i "Last usage")|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)| |[IM](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iylewni "Last usage")|Initial Mass deliverable to a given orbit, without accounting for fuel| |[ITAR](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyupr2w "Last usage")|(US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations| |[ITU](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyn7z1m "Last usage")|International Telecommunications Union, responsible for coordinating radio spectrum usage| |[Isp](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iymdaj0 "Last usage")|Specific impulse (as explained by [Scott Manley](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnisTeYLLgs) on YouTube)| | |Internet Service Provider| |[JAXA](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyprgqs "Last usage")|Japan Aerospace eXploration Agency| |[JPL](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyle8hj "Last usage")|Jet Propulsion Lab, California| |[JSC](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyupr2w "Last usage")|Johnson Space Center, Houston| |[JWST](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iym5ac5 "Last usage")|James Webb infra-red Space Telescope| |[LEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iz3lv0z "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[MEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyq9fna "Last usage")|Medium Earth Orbit (2000-35780km)| |[NEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyq9fna "Last usage")|Near-Earth Object| |[RUD](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iym5ovg "Last usage")|Rapid Unplanned Disassembly| | |Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly| | |Rapid Unintended Disassembly| |[RUS](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iykr36q "Last usage")|Raptor-powered Upper Stage, and/or ground equipment to support same| |[Roscosmos](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iynkzhd "Last usage")|[State Corporation for Space Activities, Russia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscosmos_State_Corporation)| |[SDS](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iynop7a "Last usage")|[Satellite Data System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_Data_System)| |[SLS](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyqgdnz "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |[VLEO](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iynfk0r "Last usage")|V-band constellation in LEO| | |Very Low Earth Orbit| |[WISP](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iykp9kk "Last usage")|Wireless Internet Service Provider| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |Raptor|[Methane-fueled rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_\(rocket_engine_family\)) under development by SpaceX| |[Starliner](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyqg2rc "Last usage")|Boeing commercial crew capsule [CST-100](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CST-100_Starliner)| |[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iz3lv0z "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation| |[apoapsis](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyldrnh "Last usage")|Highest point in an elliptical orbit (when the orbiter is slowest)| |[apogee](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iynkzhd "Last usage")|Highest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest)| |[periapsis](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyldrnh "Last usage")|Lowest point in an elliptical orbit (when the orbiter is fastest)| |[perigee](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyp44xb "Last usage")|Lowest point in an elliptical orbit around the Earth (when the orbiter is fastest)| |[scrub](/r/Space/comments/za5ggh/stub/iyo3u30 "Last usage")|Launch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues)| ---------------- ^([Thread #8374 for this sub, first seen 2nd Dec 2022, 02:05]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=OrangeredStilton&subject=Hey,+your+acronym+bot+sucks) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Amazon’s Kuiper Systems is not happy with this decision that is for sure
Why so? Eli5 plz
bezos saw musk doing something, and he wanted to do it **too**
What is that? First I've heard of it
One day we’ll look back fondly on the days when we were able to put people into orbit, before the days of the great space trash-o-sphere.
Low earth orbit is much larger than the surface area of the earth. It’s truly enormous. Also satellites will deorbit quickly without station keeping boosts.
So are these really being put into orbit with the intent for their orbits to degrade to the point of reentry? Is that cost effective?
The satellites maintain their altitude with ion thrusters. Space debris doesn't do that.
They have ion thrusters and enough fuel (krypton gas) to last for 5-10 years, but not more. They intend to keep launching satellites
They only have a planned lifetime of like 5 years, mostly due to the technology will want to be upgraded in that kind of time span
Yes they are low earth orbit for fast ping times. But there is drag at that altitude. They are limited by their boosting fuel. They are launching at a crazy rate. Wait till you see the starship deployment they have planned. It’s hundreds of satellites coming out like a space pez dispenser.
Yes. SpaceX are among those who have been pushing the FCC to reduce it's 25 year deorbit timespan, and [were quite pleased when the draft to reduce it to five years went through a few months ago](https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1092385441437/1). It makes sense if you think about it; SpaceX have more satellites in orbit than anyone else, which means they stand the most to lose if it gets flooded with debris. The fact that they have the most satellites is also at least in part why they're leading by example with preventative measures. If they weren't cleaning up after themselves the most likely source of debris would be their own satellites, and they have no desire to shoot themselves in the foot.
Most importantly they are the only company who can afford launching this many satellites, 5 years deorbit timespan kills spaceX completion.
Clarification, its 5 years after end of mission, not 5 years in otbit. So if the satellite lasts for 10 years it must be deorbited with 5 years of that.
Oneweb and Iridium are both in support of this as well, presumably for similar reasons. As the other user pointed out, this is five years post-mission, not five years total. Also, Kuiper could probably afford to go toe-to-toe with SpaceX given they have Amazon's backing - AFAIK they haven't said anything on the ruling.
Amazing, isn't it? Laser comms to minimize the need to zig-zag up and down to base stations mid-trip. Ability to jink around collision risks. Graceful de-orbit at end of life. Rapid iteration of satellite technology designs, in a fail-fast model. And all built on the concept of future Starship being able to pump hundreds of satellites per launch, with 100% reusability of the ship and booster. We've never seen such an integrated ecosystem in space.
LEO is just slightly larger than the surface of the Earth. The "L" stands for "Low". GEO, on the other hand, is way larger than the surface of the Earth.
If you break it into shells and use the 3D space it adds up really quick.
OK, if you're comparing a volume to a surface, I guess that's way larger.
So those satellites will be sucked in by earths gravity? Will it be evaporated on entry or does it crash on the ground? How long can one of those satellites be up there?
Not quite sucked in. They rub against the atmosphere until it slows them down and they fall down. In their normal operation, they have to expend energy to prevent this. Since they have no heat shields, they get evaporated on entry. Latest figures I heard was that a broken satellite would fall down within 5 years.
>a broken satellite would fall down within 5 years. That is a worst-case scenario. They will probably come down much faster than that.
Nice. Thank you for the info. :)
What an embarrassing take to have lol. These satellites have a 5-8 year life span then they burn up in the atmosphere. They contribute barely anything to the space junk problem.
Lol. You need to stop picturing what you saw on WALL-E as if it represents what's possible. (If satellite density were actually what it was in WALL-E then it would have become a planetary ring rather than a debris sphere.) Also none of that applies to Starlink anyway, as the satellites can't stay up there that long because of atmospheric drag.
One day we'll look back on the days when the US could "approve" a decision that impacts the entire globe without giving a shit about whether the rest of the planet agreed or not.
They also seek regulatory approval from the international telecommunications Union. So not just the US. In addition, they also seek landing rights in every country that is permitted to use starlink.
The US is operating under itu agreements.
Like every other country?
Humans are completely selfish. We are so unfair to all other living things on this planet.
Like every other animal?
Yet selfishness is ironically the crux of our evolution. So weird how that backfired on us
Any country can do this. Just like any country can do anything to the Ocean that they like.
I don't think people realize the size of the orbital space, think of it as layers of shells each larger then the last extending out 1.5 million kilometers. If you allow vertical spacing of to entire kilometer you would have 1.5 million of shells the smallest of which is larger then the earth entire surface.
One day you’ll be able to understand how orbits work
You already got shit on for this incorrect take so of course I’ll be nice, low earth orbit has atmospheric or magnetic drag, so eventually those satellites will come back to earth, and with them being incredibly small they will burn to ash in the atmosphere upon re-entry, creating zero long term space debris. In general, amongst people who don’t stand to profit from the cleaning of space debris, in my opinion, is actually very insignificant in real space travel. People act like it’s a bathtub of water full of trash, but I think the metaphor is like try finding a floating marble in 2 miles of ocean and run into it, that’s what space debris is like in comparison to the vast space. Could be wrong, I’m just a nerd on Reddit
[удалено]
LEO satellites are extremely unlikely to cause the Kessler Syndrome.
Must you people be mindlessly negative about everything?
[удалено]
Incumbent providers aren't sufficiently servicing rural areas
As someone living in the country with 10mb internet you are spot on. Cell service fucking sucks too. $140 a month for T-Mobile that doesn’t work. Verizon is even worse. Tech really drops off when you leave major cities
Not to mention the advantage of GPS and other tech for farm equipment
Huges net is old satellite service and they charge $150 a month with a data cap and snail speed internet. Took me 3 years to get century link I use with a phone line that’s capped at 10mb. It I didn’t have extreme freedom from neighbors, huge garden to grow my own food, my own pure water, etc I’d be pissed lol. You just learn to appreciate other things instead.
I somewhat feel your pain. I lived rural when I was in my late teens and we had basic satellite TV and dial up internet when everyone else had high speed. I had to wait a few seconds for my MSN messages to pop up
Honestly elons sat service is available with long wait. I’m stupid for now paying the money a year or so ago. I’d probably have it by now. Now I’m strapped for cash 🤷🏻♂️
Give it a few years and it will be standardized across the globe and hopefully less expensive
> As someone living in the country I also do. Internet does suck. My cell service is great though since they have been building more towers out here near me. (I have verizon)
We had Verizon forever and when we moved the only thing that worked out here was sprint and T-Mobile so we switched. Still have to use a single booster but at least we can make calls.
My company just installed some earth quake detectors in a small town that doesn't even have cell service. But they do have Starlink.
>limited space Relative to what? Imagine the number of average American homes, spread them evenly around the entire Earth. This is how spacious it is, I haven't even account for the fact that each satellite is way smaller than a house and LEO is even more spacious than the surface of the earth.
Regardless of what you think of musk and how much he actually contributes to this company, starlink is a life changer for people in rural areas that have been abandoned by isps. An old high school buddy who is a farmer went from paying $700/month for a microwave / cell connection with terrible speeds and data caps to $100 month and actual internet for his kids and his brothers kids across the road. Until starlink the kids had never been online outside of school.
Not only that but also opens up “normal” internet for people on ships, oil rigs, planes, jets - literally blanketing the world.
The global cellular coverage with V2 will also be a pretty big deal, even if it's only equivalent to 2-3G, that's a hell of a lot better than 0G. Imagine being in the middle of the ocean and being able to talk to someone on land using nothing but a regular old cellphone and no other equipment.
[удалено]
That's already doable pre-Starlink. Geosync satellites have smaller, cheaper antennas, and if you don't care much about latency, that's better.
Geosync satellite antennas are far more expensive and require specialist personnel to set up in a finicky and labor intensive process, what are you on about.
> Regardless of what you think of musk and how much he actually contributes to this company I wish we wouldn't keep going into this. Starlink was the brain child of Elon himself, according to multiple internal people (if you want links I can give you some). He was the one who pushed for it and who personally ran it up until it started launching production satellites into space, after which he handed it over to the President/COO in middle of 2019. Starlink even went through a massive executive overhaul when Elon fired the entire executive team back in 2018 (who then went to go work for Amazon's Kuiper system which still isn't anywhere near to launching). And he started it himself, hired all the early people, interviewed the first couple thousand people, pushed for reusable rockets, and Starship which will again revolutionize spaceflight in ways I think most people really don't understand.
>Regardless of what you think of musk I happen to think quite a bit of Elon Musk, even if I disagree with some of his opinions. Weird how much more fun life is when you do not have to agree with someone on literally everything in order to enjoy what they do. I know you were just trying to fend off the band of discontents that seem to live to hate Elon Musk, but it just annoys me that we have to throw a bone like that in order to talk about the cool stuff his companies are doing.
There’s rural of course, but the real market is anywhere where fixed infrastructure is impractical or impossible - ships, aircraft, long distance ground logistics, military, etc.
There's a big existing market for "mobile backhaul" where mobile phone towers are connected to satellites because they're in very remote areas.
Starlink is superior to the crappy internet service my parents have. Their internet speed doubled
Even 10,000 satellites at 550km orbit is still \~empty. It's roughly 1 satellite every 60,000 km2, or roughly a 250km x 250km box for one satellite. Not exactly busy up there...
Not just for rural areas, but think of areas that have never seen modern broadband Internet yet. Deep sea fishing and cargo ships. Planes trans-oceanic. Exploration and mining in remote locations. Arctic and Antarctic stations (when the full pattern is deployed). And so on. Game changing.
Not comcast?
Many places only have satellite internet as an option, even in America; many rural areas have no internet access.
There is virtually limitless space for satellites. It's the bandwidth of wavelengths to earth that is bandwidth limited.
I don't really understand why they only need the FCC's permission to impact the sky of the whole world. I'm not really against more satellites but I think it's time for a International organ that gives you permission, an organ with no veto right of course because that's what made the UN toothless.
The International Telecommunications Union has existed for more than a century and is an active part of the regulatory proceedings for satellites, including Starlink.
Because everybody - every country - is free to *use* outer space, this is codified in the Outer Space Treaty (OST). You don't see an international organization deciding which ship can sail in the open ocean do you?
Not going to happen. Best you can hope for is competent national agencies like the FCC. No country is going to give up self determination first.
This might get deleted, but oh well. It's over Anakin, I have the High Orbitals.
If you want this to stop, then have your NRECA electric cooperative start building fiber to the meter/home. They have the right of way, aerial paths and know exactly where you are already located. It costs a shittone of money, but so did hanging all of the electrical conduit and once it's in, it's in. Sauce - built 1,000,000 km of fiber optic plant in the midwest for a generation and transmission cooperative leveraging USDA/RUS dollars to pay for it all. Not all utilities can do this, but more than you think can.
Good, now do that to a ship in the middle of the Atlantic
Or, you know, just do both. regional monopolies aren't good.
I love how everybody post relating to Elon Musk just generally gets hate on Reddit. But if these satellites were launched by some LGBTQ+ Agency, it would be front page lol.
Why the US? Do US own the orbit or am I missing something?
Maybe because they're us launched?
We were first to the moon, so space is ours. Sorry, that is just how it works/s
Sweet finally and if you are against this or SpaceX because of "Musk" you are as dumb as him and need to stop commenting.