Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

simcoder t1_jazcq1a wrote

Both space stations and Hubble are in the debris path to deorbit. As are a lot of other things that people would prefer not get shredded or have to burn all their fuel dodging broken dreams.

So, a lot can happen in 5 or 10 years. Or however long it takes for the full evolution to occur. And the geopolitical ramifications could cause all sorts of strife here on the ground above and beyond the collateral damage in orbit.

To dismiss the potential consequences of a worst case scenario would be very, very foolish.


BeerPoweredNonsense t1_jazqav9 wrote

No one's dismissing it - in particular, the US authorities forced several adaptations to Starlink in order to reduce the risks of mega-constellations e.g. insisting that satellites fully burn-up on re-entry in order to minimise risks to the v1.0 humans on the ground.

It is normal to be wary, and to insist on proceeding with caution. However many of the anti-Starlink posters are just hiding their hate-boner for Elon under a pseudo-scientific veneer. E.g. mention Starlink on Reddit and you're guaranteed "Kessler Syndrome!" and "Astronomy!" replies. But posts about the other mega-constellations currently in deployment do not seem to attract the same "science-based concern" :shrugs:


simcoder t1_jb178i8 wrote

>No one's dismissing it

Yes...they are.

In fact the other guy just said that whatever collateral damage happens is just the sad wreckage we'll need to leave in our wake to move up the technological ladder.

It's pretty scary to be honest. All the things that the SpaceX fanbase is willing to sacrifice to achieve Elon's goals.


RavenchildishGambino t1_jb0wbhh wrote

The answer is to not do anything and progress.

The first time the USA made a nuclear reactor they almost melted it down.

The first time they set of a nuclear bomb they weren’t 100% sure they wouldn’t light the atmosphere on fire.

The ISS is old and near end of life.

Hubble is beyond its End of Mission date, though still useful.

5-10 years of no progress would be unfortunate, but there was more than 10 years of America unable to launch their astronauts to space. It’s not that long.

That’s why these things should be tried, but tried in LEO, where the mess will clean itself up within a generation.

Space is huge, and while I think Elon is a turd burger of a human, having 100,000 large-ish objects up in the sky (which is a huge place) can be handled with our current level of technology.


simcoder t1_jb16mkh wrote

Hmmm. Well I think you might need to do a better job convincing the Chinese that potentially sacrificing their station is just a necessary step down the road of progress.

I don't think they are going to buy your theory.


RavenchildishGambino t1_jb3lpyy wrote

I’m not going to convince the Chinese of anything.

They literally don’t care. They don’t even make sure their Long March boosters won’t deorbit and hit land in a populated area.

Since they show they don’t care, why would your argument about the Chinese be something I take even remotely seriously?

Hey China!


Also, let’s talk about human rights when you have a moment.


simcoder t1_jb3r7v1 wrote

I guess the point is that, regardless of whether you give a shit or not about collateral damage, the world likely will give a shit.

Mega-constellation debris cascades are a serious concern and shouldn't be dismissed. To do so would be extremely naive and/or foolish.


RavenchildishGambino t1_jb3rhuw wrote

Yeah. LEO orbit is huge. We’ll be good. Cheer up.


simcoder t1_jb3s341 wrote

I'm just saying that to blithely disregard the risks involved with these things is kind of foolish.


RavenchildishGambino t1_jb3s8f8 wrote

These folks are highly educated engineers and professionals. The only person taking it lightly is you, and your hyperbole.

I’m not buying it.

Go rant somewhere else please.

Have a great day, but kindly move on with this fear mongering.

This conversation is foolish.