I suppose the most interesting failure mode would be a vulnerability that
allows a hacker to make all the birds maneuver and crash into each other.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 3:46 PM Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Combine with the probability that collisions are going to be with birds
> with 90-180 degree relative vectors. Sats going in the same relative
> direction should "never" collide (he says optimistically). That means the
> combined velocities are going to go down pretty quickly (quicker de-orbit).
> Not so optimistically, they probably won't be direct hits, but more likely
> glancing blows.
>
> I expect something is going to happen in the next 5-10 years, and we will
> learn at least one failure mode.
>
> bp
> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>
>
> On 6/15/2020 12:50 PM, castarritt . wrote:
>
> 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
>
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
