Questions about LEO

[Fallingstar1971]

1. Do satellites in LEO have to compensate for the influence of Lunar Gravity? Or are they close enough to the Earth so that it doesn't matter?

2. Some asteroid deflection methods involve a "gravity tractor" to nudge it off course. Could we construct something smaller, in orbit, with enough mass so that we could tow it around behind the shuttle and de-orbit some of this junk? I suggest using the shuttle due to its flexibility and ability to retrieve cargo as well as deliver it. This object would have to remain in orbit. The shuttles cargo bay could be used as extra fuel storage if need be for extended missions(plus I think you would need the extra fuel for orbit changes and speed changes as well)

3. I only as this because space trash is becoming a bigger and bigger problem. If something isn't done we wont have to worry about exploring Mars or anywhere else. We will end up walling ourselves in, effectively interdicting the entire planet.


Star

 

[MeteorWayne]

1 No, Lunar gravity isn't a concern. The primary thing to worry about is the extremely thin atmosphere at that height; that's why the ISS has to be reboosted every few months; it slows down over time due to the very small number of atmospheric atoms it runs into.

2. Anything involving the shuttle is a moot point. There are only so many missions left, and they are all going to the ISS, with no extra payload capacity to spare.

3. There are a number of threads in Space Business and Technology discussing the issue of removing space junk. AFAIK, a gravity tractor would be less efficient than just grabbing the debris...but either idea is prohibitable expensive, with no one willing to pay for it.

MW

 

[michaelmozina]

1. Do satellites in LEO have to compensate for the influence of Lunar Gravity? Or are they close enough to the Earth so that it doesn't matter?

2. Some asteroid deflection methods involve a "gravity tractor" to nudge it off course. Could we construct something smaller, in orbit, with enough mass so that we could tow it around behind the shuttle and de-orbit some of this junk? I suggest using the shuttle due to its flexibility and ability to retrieve cargo as well as deliver it. This object would have to remain in orbit. The shuttles cargo bay could be used as extra fuel storage if need be for extended missions(plus I think you would need the extra fuel for orbit changes and speed changes as well)

3. I only as this because space trash is becoming a bigger and bigger problem. If something isn't done we wont have to worry about exploring Mars or anywhere else. We will end up walling ourselves in, effectively interdicting the entire planet.

Star

As Wayne already pointed out, no country or entity is particularly interested in spending a ton of money to clean up the mess. There is also a serious logistical problem with trying to clean up pieces of junk that are often times no bigger than a bolt or a baseball. There simply isn't an "efficient" way to fix the problem. I personally vote we wrap all future space missions in flypaper and see what sticks to the craft.

 

[Shpaget]

Is there a study (aproximation, guesstimation...) on how many pieces of debris passes through, let's say, 1 km^3?
There can't be that much of it, right? I mean not everything stays in orbit, some parts are too fast and float away, some are too slow and fall in to the atmosphere.
Just a fraction of them happens to have ideal speed vector to say in stable orbit, ain't it so? :?