This is false advertising.
Starlink was the first company and product designed to intentionally increase space junk.
Although not needing to provide and internet connection does mean FragSat is a cheaper and more superior product.
Starlink to date has not had any collisions, and it saved me from Comcast.
Flirting with Kessler syndrome so you can land trick shots in Fortnight.
The only benefit starlink has over transitional satellite internet is relatively low latency, you could have gotten a different satellite provider.
Just because there hasn’t been a collision yet, doesn’t mean there won’t be. And there has been measurable damage to ground based telescope observations due to the constant stream of starlink sats overhead.
There are plenty of reasons to criticize Starlink. Kessler syndrome isn’t one. All of the satellites are in such low orbits that they will decay relatively quickly without maintanance. As long as they have fuel they can move out of the way, and when they don’t they will burn up in the atmosphere.
Them ruining astronomy sucks. Them fucking with Ukraine suck. A lot of other things they’re doing sucks. They aren’t actually polluting orbits in any reasonable interpretation though.
Ok
No one’s landing trick shots in Fortnite on satellite internet.
Not with that attitude they’re not
Pretty sure the joke is aimed at cubesats
Launch a constellation of satellites that provide fibre optic levels of Internet service and cell signal anywhere on the globe.
Zron : nyeeh! Space junk! Elongated Muskrat!
You’re utterly cooked, buddy.
Several things can be true at the same time.
Starlink exists to give SpaceX nongovernment launches to boost its numbers and make it look good as a stock.
It also happens to provide a service at what is almost certainly a loss, considering each satellite only lasts a few years and thus requires a constant stream of replacements to be launched.
It also happens to fill the sky with a bunch of garbage that will inevitably hit something and lead to a spray of even more garbage.
It also happens to provide a service at what is almost certainly a loss, considering each satellite only lasts a few years and thus requires a constant stream of replacements to be launched.
OK, so you do get they’re in decaying orbits. Good.
It also happens to fill the sky with a bunch of garbage that will inevitably hit something and lead to a spray of even more garbage.
What garbage? You just said they decay. Be consistent. There’s plenty of reason to not like them. Kessler syndrome isn’t one.
What garbage? You just said they decay. Be consistent. There’s plenty of reason to not like them. Kessler syndrome isn’t one.
All that needs to happen is that 2 Starlink satellites collide, and then the debris won’t stay at the same elevation. It will still be on a decaying orbit, but it might hit something on a more stable orbit further up before it comes down. And the debris from the second collision won’t come down to earth anytime soon.
Sure, if a collision happens (unlikely while under control) then another collision happens (also unlikely, space is big) then sure some debris could go into a non-decaying orbit. That’s true for all satellites. Should we just not launch any because it could make things harder for other satellites?
Starlink is very unlikely to cause debris, and any debris it may cause, if any happens at all, is unlikely to cause any future problems because odds are it’d decay even faster. In the unlikely event everything goes wrong, it could cause minor issues, the same as any satellite.
Pretty much every service in the tech industry runs at a loss for a long time, that’s nothing special.
North Korea like: if I can’t have a space program nobody else can either
“Just another way we’re bringing space down to earth”
^ Fantastic tag line
Just spit balling here but is there any reason we couldn’t also make the radioactive?
Russian-American de-escalation line transcript from Dec 14th 2024:
Saltzman: Dmitry, care to enlighten me as to why exactly Roscosmos felt the need to launch a Soyuz with nothing but depleted uranium marbles on board?
Rogozin: Scy-eence
Saltzman: OK, and why the second one?
Rogozin: Ree-plecibility
Saltzman: …
Rogozin: Vhat? I dought you like spacebolls
Honestly you could do a ton of damage if you were to just yeet a metric ton or so of sand and gravel into LEO and released it in an exciting fashion
Make sure it’s in a retrograde orbit for maximum fuckery
deleted by creator
sand accelerated on a glitter bomb like spinner so you cover all angles
Imagine a starship load of glitter. The horror!
That sounds like a good way to find a spaceship full of dead astronauts with very glittery lungs.
Or when the sun hits the glitter mass just right: the beauty?
Kessler Syndrome is Bestler Syndrome.
Except for the Space Force, that is.
To be fair, something like this bud scaled up would be the only realistic way to try and fight off a hypothetical extraterrestrial invasion. Once I saw it suggested we could mass-deploy Thunder Wells to fill an orbital window with a cloud of giant steel shrapnel.
A Thunder Well is literally a bore hole with a nuke in it, and a huge steel plate on top. It was done originally as and experiment and they never did find that fucking plate; it might have been vaporized, but that’s nothing a little redesign couldn’t fix.
Simpsons did it already…
But really look at project Westford created a bit of stink
Thanks for the link, I hadn’t heard about that before.
HIMARS IN SPAAAAAACE
HIMARS chonky uncle
Forbidden ball pit
That logo of a cinder block on the moon is incredible.
Hey y’all got any more of them dark ages?
Imagine if this was how we tricked capitalists and climate deniers into launching the
UVBroad Spectrum Light shielding bubbles that expand in low pressure. Classic rugpull moment.But UV makes the food grow.
I’m not talking about the robot uprising from the matrix, I’m referring to a potential solution to climate change. I guess UV was a dumb choice of words on my part, I’ll own that.
