Should be, but in space, it's impossible to enforce.Shouldnt those who put stuff up there be responsible for the consequences like when it falls down? Like here you cant just dump stuff on the highways or let stuff block them
Just the trailer for that movie instills me with a burning rageThe movie gravity showed the damage it could cause.
We need a moon as soon as possible.So, sooner or later, there are going to be really serious occurrences which add so much to mission costings that they will become impracticable and space exploration will be costed out?
Or does this make transfer to Moon base essential at an early date?
CatI am envisaging that, if we continue to pollute space environs, and that if we wish to build Moon base(s), let alone Mars manned landing(s), there will be conflict between manned flights and increased pollution.
If we wish to 'visit' Moon and/or Mars with view to bases " twere best done quickly ". If left too long, pollution will interfere with base traffic. Base traffic will be considerably more expensive than local garbage precursors.
Flecks of paint et al. will not destroy the station, just make pits. The 5+ cm pieces are tracked and avoided. The problem is the 1-4 cm pieces we are blind to but will trash any module(s) they hit, think along the lines of a small, non-explosive artillery shell kind-of-thing. The 5+ guys are relatively rare (miss distances up to a mile or so trigger newsworthy avoidance), but the number of smaller pieces is only estimated, but the danger from them is still MUCH smaller than the danger of the Russians deliberately disabling the station out of pique.Depends on what you consider, "mid-sized". The Space Surveillance Network can track objects as small as five centimeters in diameter (in low Earth orbit). Smaller objects, down to flecks of paint can still cause serious issues with orbiting satellites/space stations. The US Shuttle had to frequently replace it's windows due to such impacts.
-Wolf sends
Do I not understand correctly, that a larger than expected space object has knocked part of the JWST about a bit?Flecks of paint et al. will not destroy the station, just make pits.
The Webb mirrors are especially especially fragile and susceptible to damage from debris. This Webb debris was very small, likely the size of a smoke particle or even smaller. And the damage is mainly miniscule misalignment and warping of the exquisitely engineered and aligned mirror segments. Does not translate to the experience of grossly large damage to earth orbiting satellites, something you can push a soccer ball through.Do I not understand correctly, that a larger than expected space object has knocked part of the JWST about a bit?
How large does one expect them to be?
Cat![]()
Also very expensive. One wonders whether any insurance company would take them on? I would agree that meteoroids can always be larger than you expect.The Webb mirrors are especially especially fragile and susceptible to damage from debris.
Since launching on Dec. 25, 2021, NASA's James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) has been pelted by at least 19 tiny space rocks — including one large one that left noticeable damage on one of the telescope's 18 gold-plated mirrors.
Fortunately, this does not seem to have caused serious damage.
Currently, I don't see how they could?...From what I have read, there are ZERO options available to avoid such events...Also very expensive. One wonders whether any insurance company would take them on? I would agree that meteoroids can always be larger than you expect.
Cat![]()
Why can't we "capture" an object of concern while still in orbit, then return it to earth and disperse of it on earth?Flecks of paint et al. will not destroy the station, just make pits. The 5+ cm pieces are tracked and avoided. The problem is the 1-4 cm pieces we are blind to but will trash any module(s) they hit, think along the lines of a small, non-explosive artillery shell kind-of-thing. The 5+ guys are relatively rare (miss distances up to a mile or so trigger newsworthy avoidance), but the number of smaller pieces is only estimated, but the danger from them is still MUCH smaller than the danger of the Russians deliberately disabling the station out of pique.
CatOne wonders whether any insurance company would take them on? I would agree that meteoroids can always be larger than you expect.
That says it all. If the probability is so small, surely one would take them on. Also, if it happened, probably neither party would be around to either claim or pay out. Meanwhile, they can collect the premiums whilst they grow old . . . . . . . . .Currently, I don't see how they could?...
Money, money, money. $100 million to capture a few suitcased sized pieces of which there are thousands, $100 million to capture a dozen or so baseball sized pieces of which there are likely 10,000. The sand grain sized can't even really be seen, and if they were, 100's of trillions of dollars, there are likely a few hundred thousand of them or more.Why can't we "capture" an object of concern while still in orbit, then return it to earth and disperse of it on earth?
They have models from older interplanetary craft, essentially the size distribution of what hits you, and the flux. Measured, known data.Do I not understand correctly, that a larger than expected space object has knocked part of the JWST about a bit?
How large does one expect them to be?
Cat![]()