Space Junk

Remove this Banner Ad

I've been fascinated by the 'space race' since childhood and with the proliferation of nanosatellites (and investment in a nanosatellite communications company) interest certainly has not waned.

The proliferation and launch schedules of smaller satellites have led to the very real issue of space junk causing collisions that result in more space junk that result in more collisions that result in... you get the idea.

It's amazing to consider that already there are multiple collisions daily with tiny fragments of space debris, as shown by this panel from the Hubble space telescope:



From article: https://www.businessinsider.com.au/...space-could-end-in-disaster-for-us-all-2017-6

Has anyone else looked at this in detail or have more interesting articles on the Kessler Syndrome?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #3
What was I hearing about the idea that soon it will be hard to actually launch anything given the field of debris in orbit?
There are big international efforts track all pieces of space junk (larger than 10cm) but even that doesn't guarantee the absolute safety of launches given anything under 10cm travelling at 1,000s of km/h can cause significant damage.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Obviously a good way of solving this problem (like most environmental disasters) is to stop adding to it. The laser broom looks promising at removing small pieces of space debris. Slow it down by a little and it will fall back in months instead of years or decades. Below 250km, air resistance is high enough to remove it in a month. The altitude of the fallen space station (applies to all space junk) shows this - it fell the last 150km in a day:




Another factor that can help is a solar maximum which slightly expands the atmosphere and increases drag in low orbit.

Longer term hopefully advances in propulsion will cheapen space travel to the point where a "garbage collector" ship can fly out and fetch large pieces of junk, especially anything in medium or high orbit which will never fall back to Earth. Wishful thinking?
 
Longer term hopefully advances in propulsion will cheapen space travel to the point where a "garbage collector" ship can fly out and fetch large pieces of junk, especially anything in medium or high orbit which will never fall back to Earth. Wishful thinking?
1kvpLb6.jpg
 
Chinese already did this and made an awful ******* mess up there testing a kinetic missile against one of their old satellites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_missile_test
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)



And some background: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome
Utterly irresponsible by the Russians. I can't think of a single reason to do this except make orbit in the 400-450 km band more dangerous. We already know the Russians have ASAT capability. So why do it? As usual with the Russians they start of lying, ie we didn't do it. When they can't hide it they then say it's not dangerous. Absolute BS. Recent space walk cancelled because of debris NASA astronauts will spacewalk on Thursday after space debris alert | Space
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #16
Utterly irresponsible by the Russians. I can't think of a single reason to do this except make orbit in the 400-450 km band more dangerous. We already know the Russians have ASAT capability. So why do it? As usual with the Russians they start of lying, ie we didn't do it. When they can't hide it they then say it's not dangerous. Absolute BS. Recent space walk cancelled because of debris NASA astronauts will spacewalk on Thursday after space debris alert | Space
It must be pretty serious to cancel a spacewalk when you consider there are many more small particles that NASA can't yet track.
The proliferation of LEO satellites and how far costs have come down to but CU space on launch rockets means the number of small satellites in those lower orbits has exploded in recent years and is likely to double again in the next few years
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top