Absolutely debunked, FAA accepted a report that didn’t do proper research and have been called out by SpaceX for it.
Someone downvoted you but you are correct. The report used assumptions based on satellites not even made of the same materials as starlink satellites.
Among other things, SpaceX said the FAA’s debris estimates were based on a 23-year-old study of satellites that were made with different materials than Starlink satellites. SpaceX says its own satellites are designed to burn up completely when they reenter the atmosphere.
The FAA report to Congress did include a caveat that said, “If SpaceX is correct in reporting zero surviving debris, as SpaceX reports in FCC filings, and Starlink is a fully-demisable spacecraft, the rise in reentry risk is minimal over the current risk.”
“If SpaceX is
correcthonest in reporting zero surviving debris, as SpaceX reports in FCC filings, and Starlink is a fully-demisable spacecraft, the rise in reentry risk is minimal over the current risk.”
Yeah, I was going to say that there is no way that could be correct. There are only like 8000 satellites in orbit. There is no fucking way that small of a number is going to be hurting someone every couple years.
The people that put sats up have to calculate how every component will burn up in the atmosphere before they even get approval. Simply put, there’s basically no chance of anyone dying from these things reentering the atmosphere.
Lol SpaceX. Why would I take them seriously?
Who wouldn’t? They are doing some of the most advanced rocket science on the planet. Of course, trusting corporations statements and research is an entire topic of it’s own. Taking Elon Musk seriously on the other hand…
Because they are a corporation that is actively littering LEO with hundreds of satellites, and fear economic retribution and/or responsibility as a consequence of this kind of information?
You see how there might be something called “conflict of interest?”
Having a conflict of interest does not mean they aren’t competent at what they do - just that they have reason to be biased against information that may result in direct consequence.
While SpaceX does launch and operate thousands of satellites, this also means that they stand to lose the most if LEO becomes cluttered with space junk. If anyone ought to be worried about space junk, it is the launch providers. If space junk becomes a problem, their customer base vanishes.
Ok Thre-ElonMusk-eteers.
You keep gobbling that knob. Maybe daddy will pay attention to you one day
deleted by creator
Wow, I’ve never heard about “GIZCHINA”. It definitely isn’t gizmodo - right? 🤔 Right!
- it is a Czech company with entire capital stock consisting of 4USD 😎 (cca 100 CZK)
- the text is showing hight probability of AI generation. Which adult human being is going to write eg: " In this article, we will discuss the FAA report in detail, including the risks posed by falling satellites, the causes of these risks, and the potential solutions to mitigate them." 🤖
- it does not say anything else than this - much more likely human written thing here - only the original is only 1/3 as long. That is IMO how come the AI Writing is literraly jumping out on you from the article. 😱
This is my least favourite century yet.
TBF the original article you linked is in Chinese and does not have ads in the middle of the article, so you should compare their translated lengths.
All in all we need the original FAA report.
The thumbnail image isn’t even a satellite…
The dragon capsule isn’t going to suddenly fall out of orbit somewhere unexpected…
The dragon capsule isn’t going to suddenly fall out of orbit somewhere unexpected…
It’s highly unlikely, but the possibility isn’t 0. Like, what if an untracked asteroid hits it out of orbit?
There are around 50,000 Starlink near misses per year.
Well, the chance isn’t zero, but that example, being knocked out (disabled or destroyed) by an asteroid has never happened to any spacecraft, ever. Statically the chances of that happening are very very close to zero.
the probability that the satellite debris will not be completely burned during the fall and cause injury or death to people on the ground is 0.6 per year. This means it would happen once every two years
That doesn’t mean it will fucking hit someone. The surface area of the planet is 510e12 m^2. There are about 8B people on the planet. Even if we conservatively assume that everyone is lying flat on their back in the middle of an open field, that’s only about 8B m^2 of vulnerable surface area. At that rate, you’d expect an injury interval of 510e12 / 8e9 / 0.6 = 1 injury every 106 thousand years. Yes there is some correlation of common orbits and human population, so we can be conservative and put it at 50,000 years.
Do we know who this ‘someone’ is? Sucks to be them.
deleted by creator
That sounds like a twisted version of missile command.
Heat me out: Burnout crash mode, but with falling satellites.
ISS Space station final upgrade
This completely ignores the fact that the 2034 Full Self Driving beta release roadmap includes falling satellite avoidance capabilities.
This article was either written by AI, or a human with an IQ of 50
So far, no one has ever been killed by a meteorite. There’s been a scary injury, some unconfirmed rumors and at least one engine block was cracked in half.
That said, death by thing falling from space is totally how I want to die. Bonus points if I’m totally disintegrated and just MIA. ( Circuitboard. It was man made. Has anyone seen Uriel? ) A falling satellite will be fine.
Perhaps fetching all of that junk might be a good idea? Perhaps a satellite trash collector satellite.
