Discussion Cleaning up the space junk?

orb

New member
News Reporter
Joined
Oct 30, 2009
Messages
14,020
Reaction score
4
Points
0
So not a solar sail really then. Just a sail. Thanks for the info.
It is still a solar sail, but atmospheric drag dominates over the radiation pressure, but it was intended to deploy it in LEO instead above of the atmosphere, inter alia, to test the deorbit capability. A drifting sailboat without wind is still a sailboat.
 

agentgonzo

Grounded since '09
Addon Developer
Joined
Feb 8, 2008
Messages
1,649
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Location
Hampshire, UK
Website
orbiter.quorg.org
It is still a solar sail, but atmospheric drag dominates over the radiation pressure, but it was intended to deploy it in LEO instead above of the atmosphere, inter alia, to test the deorbit capability. A drifting sailboat without wind is still a sailboat.
A drifting sailboat without wind is still a sailboat ... because the sail was intended to catch the wind even though there is currently none. The sail on these satellites is intended to catch the upper atmosphere rather than anything solar (solar wind), hence my confusion. Either way it's semantics and interpretation and a tangent from the thread.

---------- Post added at 09:51 ---------- Previous post was at 09:50 ----------

And coincidentally /. have just picked up on the story
 

Mojave

60% Ethanol
Moderator
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
1,647
Reaction score
132
Points
78
Location
Somewhere, but not here.
Install a retro engine on all new satellites, and they can deorbit. This would prevent future space junk.
 

garyw

O-F Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
10,485
Reaction score
209
Points
138
Location
Kent
Website
blog.gdwnet.com
Which increases cost, weight, complexity and allows more things to go wrong. You want something nice and simple so that when you decomission a satellite you don't have to do anything aside from send a command and then wait.
 

jedidia

shoemaker without legs
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
10,893
Reaction score
2,141
Points
203
Location
between the planets
And as for Switzerland, its like trusting a Ferengi...

:rofl:

Anyways, No matter what method is chosen to get rid of the junk, one thing is certain: It will increase launch cost. Be it because every launch has to pay a fee to finance a clean-up operation or because every launched piece needs some device to help de-orbit it. Launch costs are already high as they are, so... I don't see it happening.
 

T.Neo

SA 2010 Soccermaniac
Addon Developer
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
6,368
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Which increases cost, weight, complexity and allows more things to go wrong. You want something nice and simple so that when you decomission a satellite you don't have to do anything aside from send a command and then wait.

The advantage of an actual deorbit motor is the fact that it can allow you to choose your deorbit site though. If you deorbit anywhere, you have a higher chance of hitting something someone actually cares about...

I don't see it happening.

If that's the attitude people have towards the problem, I hope they don't come crying when their satellites start dying en-masse and human civilisation starts to revert to an information dark age akin to the 1950s...

Kessler syndrome is the kind of thing that starts out small, and then gets worse, and worse, and WORSE. It's an environmental pollution problem.

The funny thing about it though, is generally people don't care about the space environment at all, but the pollution of our orbital environment could be highly disruptive to many fields...
 

N_Molson

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
9,295
Reaction score
3,266
Points
203
Location
Toulouse
Maybe a little fleet of small orbital tugs, powered by ionic thrusters and solar panels. The most difficult point would be to find an "universal grapple system" so that they could attach themselves to the target and perform a retrograde burn. When the orbit of the target would be low enough to quickly decay, the tug would release it's prey and go hunting for the next one.
 

Ghostrider

Donator
Donator
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
3,606
Reaction score
2
Points
78
Location
Right behind you - don't look!
Why not have the tugs carry a good reserve of disposable solid-fueled thrusters? We only need an adhesive to stick it to the target and then fire it by remote. Of course, it would need some good evaluation of the target so that the thrust passes through the center of mass, you don't want a firewheel in space...
 

statickid

CatDog from Deimos
Donator
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
1,683
Reaction score
4
Points
38
for some reason I feel like this topic will just continue to be ignored until it become EXTREMELY pressing. who wants to spend huge money cleaning up other peoples messes? i think that space projects will just try to skirt around this until it starts causing horrible failures.

another thing I see happening is maybe space debris hitting one expensive or crewed project and then having some loose precautions installed meant to limit space debris and then just moving higher into space. :shrug:

---------- Post added at 07:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:46 AM ----------

http://www.space.com/10084-successful-satellite-kill.html

just found this on another thread and thought it was pretty crazy! huzzah for space debris!
 

Capt_hensley

Captain, USS Pabilli
Donator
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
841
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Alamogordo
Website
www.h-10-k.com
Something no one has mentioned yet is the millions of 1 inch long copper needles the US military released in LEO. According to NORAD, they still track as many as possible, numbering in the millions, but slightly less than the number released.

Orbital decay from LEO is no fast thing. The experiment took place in the 60's. Look it up.

One thing for sure, we need to do something about all of it. Until it's a lucrative endeavor, it will be very low priority.

De-orbit motors don't cost all that much in weight, complexity, or expense, read up on that subject as well. It's a movement already afoot by the ESA. Everyone seems to have a fair idea of what to do, but nobody seems terribly interested in funding it.

Again an interesting discussion!
 

garyw

O-F Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
10,485
Reaction score
209
Points
138
Location
Kent
Website
blog.gdwnet.com
The advantage of an actual deorbit motor is the fact that it can allow you to choose your deorbit site though. If you deorbit anywhere, you have a higher chance of hitting something someone actually cares about...

You have a point but it's very, very unlikely that you'll hit something with a deorbiting satellite especially as they can be designed to burn up over 90% of the structure.
 

agentgonzo

Grounded since '09
Addon Developer
Joined
Feb 8, 2008
Messages
1,649
Reaction score
4
Points
38
Location
Hampshire, UK
Website
orbiter.quorg.org
One of these should be able to solve the problem easily:
F5BFAFBEE6F7BF11A3CF6ED6CAC4.jpg
 

River Crab

SpaceX Cheer Captain
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
945
Reaction score
3
Points
18
Location
Washington, D.C. area
garyw said:
You have a point but it's very, very unlikely that you'll hit something with a deorbiting satellite especially as they can be designed to burn up over 90% of the structure.
That explanation might not work for some people on the ground... :rolleyes:

Anyway, I really think it should be made international convention (perhaps an amendment to the Outer Space Treaty) that any artificial Earth satellite must either deorbit, escape, or go to a graveyard orbit, within some specified period after the end of its design life, or after the end of its operational life if still functioning.

This convention alone might not work, because companies would just give their satellites useless secondary objectives in order to claim that they are "still operating" after they have reached their design life, or find other such loopholes.

And good luck getting everyone to approve of it/not decide to ignore it... :uhh:
 

garyw

O-F Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
Addon Developer
Tutorial Publisher
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
10,485
Reaction score
209
Points
138
Location
Kent
Website
blog.gdwnet.com
There is already something in law that requires each nation to be responsible for their own space debris. however, that might only apply to Geosync orbits. I know that with those orbits spacecraft need to be moved to a graveyard orbit once at the end of their operational life.
 

Capt_hensley

Captain, USS Pabilli
Donator
Joined
Oct 20, 2010
Messages
841
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Alamogordo
Website
www.h-10-k.com
Guys, Graveyard orbits still contribute to the congestion. Everything must be de-orbited at the end of it's life cycle. For booster stages that's right after satellite release. Clean separation techniques that leave no debris, unlike explosive bolts the leave tiny bits of everything, need to be used. Paint is an issue, we need to do more about minimizing paint usage and so on. GEO LEO or MEO it all has to go. It's all hazardous.
 

N_Molson

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
9,295
Reaction score
3,266
Points
203
Location
Toulouse
US concern about Russian & Chinese satellites trajectories

[FONT=VERDANA, ARIAL, HELVETICA, SANS-SERIF][SIZE=+2]Nearly 400 satellite crash notices sent to Russia, China[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=VERDANA, ARIAL, HELVETICA, SANS-SERIF][SIZE=-2]BY STEPHEN CLARK
SPACEFLIGHT NOW

Posted: June 15, 2011

[/SIZE][/FONT]TONBRIDGE, England -- Since instituting a new policy to inform commercial and international satellite operators of collision threats, the U.S. Air Force has issued hundreds of notifications to Russia and China warning of possible crashes between their satellites and other objects in orbit, according to a U.S. State Department official.

debris.jpg

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-2]This artist's rendering shows the distribution of objects in orbit above Earth. Image not to scale. Credit: European Space Agency


[/SIZE][/FONT]Frank Rose, a deputy assistant secretary of state for space and defense policy, said the Air Force has sent 252 warnings to Russia and 147 notices to China over the past year.

Speaking Monday at an international space security conference in Prague, Rose said U.S. Strategic Command's Joint Space Operations Center issued 677 warnings to U.S. government and private sector satellite owners in the same time period.

Satellites in low Earth orbit speed around the planet at more than 17,000 mph. At such high velocities, kinetic impact energy from a collision has an explosive effect, creating new debris and destroying the satellite.

Since the beginning of 2010, satellite owners and operators have maneuvered their satellites more than 100 times in response to the Air Force notices, according to Rose, who works in the State Department Bureau of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance.

"Such notifications are themselves an important confidence building measure, and they also provide the basis for pursuit of other bilateral [transparency and confidence-building measures] in diplomatic, military-to-military, and scientific channels," Rose said.

Not only do the warnings promote trust, they also guard against further collisions between spacecraft that could generate more debris, producing a scenario where the amount of junk grows exponentially.
"Debris begets debris," said Gen. William Shelton, head of Air Force Space Command. "We have not found a way that is either technically nor economically viable to eliminate debris."

The notifications arose out of the U.S. National Space Policy released by the White House last year. The policy document called for mitigating the threat from orbital debris and building trust among private and international operators.

The paper specifically mentioned disseminating tracking information to commercial and international entities as part of renewed focus on preserving the space environment and the responsible use of space.
The Air Force tracks more than 22,000 objects in orbit, and experts believe there are thousands more too small to be spotted from existing radars. About 1,100 of those objects are active satellites.

"That number is projected to triple by 2030, and much of that is improved sensors, but some of that is increased traffic," Shelton said in April. "Then if you think about it, there are probably 10 times more objects in space than we're able to track with our sensor capability today. Those objects are untrackable, yet they are lethal to our space systems -- to military space systems, civil space systems, commercial -- no one's immune from the threats that are on orbit today, just due to the traffic in space."

15debris_400282.jpg


A Chinese test of an anti-satellite weapon in 2007 and the collision of a dead Russian satellite with an Iridium communications craft in 2009 unleashed thousands of new pieces of debris in low Earth orbit a few hundred miles above Earth.

Hundreds of operational satellites pass through that region of space, including the space shuttle and International Space Station.

After the 2009 collision, the Air Force began sharing collision warnings with a wider group of operators. Most orbital tracking data is publicly available, and the military offers additional support services to organizations and governments who sign formal agreements.

The Air Force began sending email collision warnings to all operators in early 2010.
 
Last edited:
Top