A low orbit bird isn't going to get smacked from behind, so it would be reasonable to assume that the vast majority if not all of the debris will lose velocity instead of gaining it. Also, small chunks of satellite should have a lower ballistic coefficient than an intact satellite (mass reduced by cube of size vs surface area reduced by square), so they should experience greater decceleration from atmospheric drag.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 2:42 PM Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> wrote: > When things collide they will go many different directions and velocities, > there is no calculation for when that will be cleared, or even where the > debris even is > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 2:36 PM Robert Andrews <i...@avantwireless.com> > wrote: > >> So was my thoughts about debris correct. If it becomes a shitshow does >> it clear itself out in 5 years? >> >> On 06/15/2020 12:13 PM, Carl Peterson wrote: >> > A generic calculation for a 500km orbit gives you around 10 years. The >> > design of the starlink satellite is somewhat optimized for this in that >> > when it is controllable it presents a knife edge to atmospheric drag >> but >> > uncontrolled it will slowly start to tumble and degrade much faster. >> ~5 >> > years at 550km without looking it up. >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 2:02 PM Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com >> > <mailto:part15...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > >> > SpaceX states that at the current service altitude, the satellites >> will >> > be-orbit in ~~ 5 years. That's one of the reasons they went with the >> > lower service altitude. The original was up substantially; perhaps >> > where >> > the 10 year number came from. >> > >> > >> > bp >> > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> > >> > On 6/15/2020 11:44 AM, Robert Andrews wrote: >> > > & I believe debris at that altitude deorbits even faster.. >> > > >> > > On 06/15/2020 10:51 AM, castarritt . wrote: >> > >> with a ~500km altitude, they deorbit naturally after ~10years >> > from drag. >> > >> >> > >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 12:36 PM Adam Moffett >> > <dmmoff...@gmail.com <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com> >> > >> <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com <mailto:dmmoff...@gmail.com>>> >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Theoretically a Ubiquiti Nanostation was carrier grade and >> > would do >> > >> 150Mbps. It said so on the datasheet. >> > >> >> > >> Just saying maybe the small, cheap satellite will work >> > exactly as >> > >> intended and maybe it'll have a firmware crash during a >> > sunspot and >> > >> just become a piece of high velocity garbage. Even a low >> > failure >> > >> rate over many years could eventually leave a whole crapload >> > of them >> > >> buzzing around up there. >> > >> >> > >> .....I'm sure people smarter than me have thought of all >> that. >> > >> Haven't they? >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On 6/15/2020 1:26 PM, Bill Prince wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>> WRT orbiting debris; it's all good until the first >> "accident". >> > >>> Then we will see how this all shakes out. If it's bad >> > enough, it >> > >>> could cause SpaceX (and all its brethren) to relinquish >> all the >> > >>> orbital space unless/until they provide a mitigation plan. >> > To some >> > >>> extent they are structuring their constellation to de-orbit >> > >>> quickly already. Plus their sats are theoretically >> designed to >> > >>> de-orbit on their own at end of life. >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> bp >> > >>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> > >>> >> > >>> On 6/15/2020 9:48 AM, Steve Jones wrote: >> > >>>> That explains what this whole CHAZ thing is, they wanted >> first >> > >>>> chance at some space x bandwidth. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Im not a fan of star link, i think its going to cause some >> > major >> > >>>> debris field issues in space for future generations. But >> > nobody >> > >>>> can argue with the fact that it is really cool that a guy >> like >> > >>>> musk exists who just wants to do some really cool shit, >> so he >> > >>>> does some really cool shit. Every kid at some point in >> > life said, >> > >>>> I wanna go to mars. Hes just like, yeah, imma go to mars. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 6:04 PM Robert >> > <i...@avantwireless.com <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com> >> > >>>> <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com >> > <mailto:i...@avantwireless.com>>> wrote: >> > >>>> >> > >>>> They are already peering in Seattle, and will only be >> > >>>> northern latitudes for a year according to a >> "insider" ( >> > >>>> there are hundreds if not thousands of them ).... >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> On 6/14/20 1:16 PM, Bill Prince wrote: >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> In case anyone was watching SpaceX put up another 58 >> > >>>>> Starlink sats on Saturday. That puts them at almost >> > double >> > >>>>> the number they claimed to need to enable their >> "private >> > >>>>> beta". I'm sure it's underway, plus they're running >> some >> > >>>>> kind of test with the US military. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> All the sats except for the first batch of 60 are of >> > the 1.0 >> > >>>>> design. Depending on which news blurb you read, these >> > sats >> > >>>>> all have to relay directly through ground stations, >> > or they >> > >>>>> have some limited ability to go sat-to-sat via an RF >> > link. >> > >>>>> We may find out before the end of the year. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> They also stated that they c/would start the public >> beta >> > >>>>> when they had ~~ 800 sats in orbit. By my seat-of the >> > pants >> > >>>>> estimation, that will be another 4-1/2 launches from >> now; >> > >>>>> maybe another 3 months. Call it September, but who >> knows. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> I think the biggest obstacle at this point is their >> pizza >> > >>>>> box/flying saucer on a stick user terminal. I heard >> one >> > >>>>> estimate that the build cost for it are in the >> > neighborhood >> > >>>>> of $1200. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> I would say by the beginning of 2021, this topic >> will not >> > >>>>> longer be "OT". >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> If you want to get notification when they can service >> > your >> > >>>>> area, go here <https://www.starlink.com/>. >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> -- >> > >>>>> bp >> > >>>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>>> -- AF mailing list >> > >>>> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >> > <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>> >> > >>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > >>>> >> > >>>> >> > >>> >> > >> -- AF mailing list >> > >> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> <mailto: >> AF@af.afmug.com >> > <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>> >> > >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > AF mailing list >> > AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com> >> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > Carl Peterson >> > >> > *PORT NETWORKS* >> > >> > 401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 >> > >> > Baltimore, MD 21202 >> > >> > (410) 637-3707 >> > >> > >> > >> >> -- >> AF mailing list >> AF@af.afmug.com >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
