• freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    In the past 6 months, Starlink satellites made 50,000 collision avoidance maneuvers. They now maneuver 275 times a day to avoid crashing into other space objects.

    They use an on board AI to calculate the positions, but each time they course-correct, it throws off forecasting accuracy for several days. So a collision isn’t an if, it’s a when, and suddenly we’re in Kessler Syndrome territory. Or maybe enough people will eventually wake up and realize Musk was an actual idiot all along.

    But until then, great, low pings for video calls. Hurray.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is completely factually inaccurate. 2 minutes on Google will help you learn but seeing as how you’ve been spewing crap all over this thread I don’t think it’s worth my time to even bother helping you understand.

        • ebc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Shortest answer is that even if all Starlink satellites suddently exploded at the same time for no reason, they’d fall back to Earth in a matter of weeks. They’re waaaay lower than the other satellites you’re thinking of (see discussion on geo-stationary satellites for why), so they need to be actively pushed every few days just to stay up. They’re so low they’re still subject to atmospheric drag.

            • ebc
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              They’d burn up / vapourize. This is partly why it took them so long to get their space lasers to work (for satellite to satellite communications); these things usually are usually based on a crystal that wouldn’t burn and could hurt someone when the satellite falls.

                • ebc
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Man, you really are looking for any excuse to hate on SpaceX, right?

                  If you’re that worried about pollution, just look up the mass of a starlink satellite vs the mass a coal plant burns every hour… Even if the satellite ends up vapourizing as 100% pollution, I’m pretty sure it’s orders of magnitude below other industries like coal power or aviation.

                  • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Sure asking questions is making excuses to hate SpaceX.

                    Is it polluting or not? I actually expected you’d show it wasnt at all. I literally don’t know either way but if you aren’t comfortable explaining your position on it thats fine.

        • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Search the web for “star link Kessler syndrome”. It’s well documented. It’s also discussed elsewhere in this thread.

        • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Search the web for “starlink Kessler syndrome”. It’s very well documented. It’s also discussed elsewhere in this thread.