SpaceX Starlink satellites had to make 25,000 collision-avoidance maneuvers in just 6 months — and it will only get worse

[Admin]

Exponential growth in Starlink orbital collision avoidance maneuvers in the past six months is sparking concerns over the long-term sustainability of satellite operations.

SpaceX Starlink satellites had to make 25,000 collision-avoidance maneuvers in just 6 months — and it will only get worse : Read more

 

[bobby2ms]

starlink shouldve used new kind of satellite tech, where it could serve millions by one satellite in place of numerous satellites and even if they employ such tech in future, it wont be any use as damage is already done(blocking ground based telescopes, space junk etc).

 

[abrogard]

I would like to know what they use for fuel to keep making these manoevres.

 

[HumboldtRick]

Launching so much space junk should have never been allowed.

 

[Richard Rodgers]

Doubling every six months is geometric growth. Squaring every six months would be exponential.

 

[Eric F]

All Starlink satellites are at 515 and 520 km height, right? And there is no other satellites at those 2 layers. Why so many avoidance maneuvers?

 

[Atlan0001]

Four or more "2001: A Space Odyssey" type space stations squarely placed could probably handle the entire system job in a far more compact space and maintain it, plus have many other profitable (in many more ways than one) orbital functions besides. Starlink type systems are becoming infinitely expensive mass litter-cheap orbital junk system trash dumps.

 

[PlasmaRocket]

I would like to know what they use for fuel to keep making these manoevres.

V1 and v1.5 Starlink satellites use krypton in an electric propulsion system for maneuvers. V2 will use argon.

 

[PlasmaRocket]

All Starlink satellites are at 515 and 520 km height, right? And there is no other satellites at those 2 layers. Why so many avoidance maneuvers?

25,000 maneuvers in 6 months with 4000 satellites is slightly more than one conjunction avoidance maneuver per satellite per month. That sounds much less scary than the author would imply. Operational altitude is 547km for the majority of the satellites.

 

[Pogo]

But, they can’t detect and avoid on their own. It requires groups such as NORAD and computers to predict such trajectories, then tell the controllers of the spacecraft, then compute a safe maneuver, then upload the commands, and activate them. And if they miss one? More debris.

@Eric F: post No. 6: So much junk and debris up there, and each one is slowly decaying so they pass through those altitudes as they eventually decay into the atmosphere and burn up. It’s not unusual anymore for folks to see debris burning up nowadays.

 

[DanIAm]

This line "the SpaceX satellites have been forced to move over 50,000 times to prevent collisions." This is making an inference akin to hitting the brakes when a deer jumps into the path of a car. That is not how it is, they know the paths of all tracked objects (operational and junk from 5cm and bigger), they make corrections not to avoid emergency collisions for the most part, but to ensure a clear seperation. Think of it as planes converging at airports, controlled airspaces ensure a minimum seperation (in Australia a minimum 5.5km between planes), planes are given courses to modify their route to keep that safe level of seperation with as much advanced notification and as much clear space as is pragmatic.

25,000 corrections in 6 months for 4,000 satellites. Yep, 25,000 is a big scary number, but it's 1 alteration per satellite per month, not emergency except in rare cases, but adjustments made in advance.

These satellites are neglible as a problem. They are in low orbit, specifically intended deorbit at the end of their life (a nominal life of 5 to 7 years), made to manouvre and even if all systems fried they will deorbit quickly due to being so low (5 to 10 years).

If talking about space junk, the issue is all the little itsy tiny bits of deliberately blown up stuff (and damn I'm angry at those governments that have done that), stages, dead satellites, and other gear just left up there, which in higher orbits than Starlinks will be there for thousands of years.

Starlink - as it currently is, is not a space junk problem, that finger needs to be pointed elsewhere (e.g. the above paragraph).

 

[Pogo]

Vanguard I, the fourth satellite launched by the U.S. on 17 March 1958, is still up there.