Let them eat starlink!
Let them eat starlink!
250 comments
-
I only have this to say: Fuck the sky pollution. Starlink has been ruining stargazing and star photography and Elon lied about its impact. He claimed they would be invisible with his amazing paint but they're still visible and fuck it up for people who enjoy watching the stars.
-
I see them all the time without a camera. They are bright as the stars when they pass over.
-
pros and cons...
pros:
- internet in remote places
cons:
- at the cost of literallt everything else
-
-
If you think ruining stargazing is the biggest problem, don't look up Satellite Collision Cascades
The fucking muskrat is going to lock us down to Earth and make launches too dangerous due to debris fields
And all of you are just complaining about artificial light
-
Well I don't see myself going to space any time soon. But I do see myself watching the nightsky a lot.
You're right though. It's another thing he doesn't care about.
-
It's important that we think of future generations, statistically this cascade could easily happen in our lifetimes
-
They are low enough that it'd probably fix itself over time. It'd be a big problem, but I feel comming generations have bigger ones.
-
Ok well I have aerospace engineering friends that disagree, and if those quiet mousy guys are panicking then I think they may be on to something
-
Oh, I mean, it would be bad, even if it "just" meant no/unsafe launches and no LEO for X months/years. I just kinda feels it pales compared to the climate related problems coming generations are likely to face.
-
... an ablative cascade would destroy nearly every satellite and would render ALL launches russian roulette with 5 chambers filled, and it would last for centuries.
I really have no idea where you are getting your numbers from but there's ALREADY enough high velocity mass to make LEO a minefield for generations and we're not stopping launching.
-
Pulling them out of my ass, mostly. Like, the people I know in the field don't seem overly worried, but my own opinion mostly comes from a general awareness that stuff in LEO comes down eventually, and that for the orbit the Starlink Stuff is on, that would probably mean a few years max.
Not my field, and if I actually research it, I might find I'm wrong.
I still maintain that even a complete loss of launch and orbital capability, while of course a great and horrible disaster, wouldn't doom us much more than our current course as a species already is.
-
I'm sorry but physics calculations have no room for opinion
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Starlink satellites are in low earth orbit and deorbit naturally after a few years because of the small amounts of escaping atmosphere slowing them down. A collision cascade can't really happen because it's a fundamentally decaying orbit.
At least, there's no risk of lasting orbital debris, at the cost of the satellites having a much shorter lifespan.
-
I have aerospace engineering friends that disagree, but I'm sure your wikipedia university degree is useful somewhere
Ablative cascades have more than enough energy to kick debris fields up orbit as impact velocities can hit 10 kilometers a second
JSYK that kind of energy can punch a paint flake through a quarter inch of titanium
-
... Well, fortunately, I don't manage satellite deployments, but your friends are welcome to tell NASA that their aerospace engineers are actually wrong and need to stop SpaceX before they ground humanity. I'm sure they would love to hear it.
-
The fucking NASA scientist that came up with this scenario is Donald Kessler, it is literally named after him
They have been warning about this since before you were born.
Why are you so fundamentally resistant to truth?
-
-
-
-
-
250 comments