SpaceX Alleges a Chinese-Deployed Satellite Risked Colliding with Starlink (pcmag.com)
(Monday December 15, 2025 @03:34AM (EditorDavid)
from the give-me-space dept.)
- Reference: 0180386387
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/25/12/15/033255/spacex-alleges-a-chinese-deployed-satellite-risked-colliding-with-starlink
- Source link: https://www.pcmag.com/news/spacex-alleges-a-chinese-satellite-risked-colliding-with-starlink
"A SpaceX executive says a satellite deployed from a Chinese rocket risked colliding with a Starlink satellite," [1]reports PC Magazine :
> On Friday, company VP for Starlink engineering, Michael Nicolls, [2]tweeted about the incident and blamed a lack of coordination from the Chinese launch provider CAS Space. "When satellite operators do not share ephemeris for their satellites, dangerously close approaches can occur in space," he wrote, referring to the publication of predicted orbital positions for such satellites...
>
> [I]t looks like one of the satellites veered relatively close to a Starlink sat that's been in service for over two years. "As far as we know, no coordination or deconfliction with existing satellites operating in space was performed, resulting in a 200 meter (656 feet) close approach between one of the deployed satellites and STARLINK-6079 (56120) at 560 km altitude," Nicolls wrote... "Most of the risk of operating in space comes from the lack of coordination between satellite operators — this needs to change," he added.
Chinese launch provider CAS Space told PCMag that "As a launch service provider, our responsibility ends once the satellites are deployed, meaning we do not have control over the satellites' maneuvers."
And the article also cites astronomer/satellite tracking expert Jonathan McDowell, who had tweeted that CAS Space's response " [3]seems reasonable ." (In an email to PC Magazine , he'd said "Two days after launch is beyond the window usually used for predicting launch related risks."
But "The coordination that Nicolls cited is becoming more and more important," [4]notes Space.com , since "Earth orbit is getting more and more crowded."
> In 2020, for example, [5]fewer than 3,400 functional satellites were whizzing around our planet. Just five years later, that number has soared to [6]about 13,000 , and more spacecraft are going up all the time. Most of them belong to SpaceX. The company currently operates [7]nearly 9,300 Starlink satellites , more than 3,000 of which have launched this year alone.
>
> Starlink satellites avoid potential collisions autonomously, maneuvering themselves away from conjunctions predicted by available tracking data. And this sort of evasive action is quite common: Starlink spacecraft performed about [8]145,000 avoidance maneuvers in the first six months of 2025, which works out to around four maneuvers per satellite per month. That's an impressive record. But many other spacecraft aren't quite so capable, and even Starlink satellites can be blindsided by spacecraft whose operators don't share their trajectory data, as Nicolls noted.
>
> And even a single collision — between two satellites, or involving pieces of space junk, which are plentiful in Earth orbit as well — could spawn a huge cloud of debris, which could cause further collisions. Indeed, the nightmare scenario, known as [9]the Kessler syndrome , is a debris cascade that makes it difficult or impossible to operate satellites in parts of the final frontier.
[1] https://www.pcmag.com/news/spacex-alleges-a-chinese-satellite-risked-colliding-with-starlink
[2] https://x.com/michaelnicollsx/status/1999630601046097947
[3] https://x.com/planet4589/status/1999806402450362796
[4] https://www.space.com/space-exploration/satellites/spacecraft-from-chinese-launch-nearly-slammed-into-starlink-satellite-spacex-says
[5] https://sia.org/historic-number-of-launches-powers-commercial-satellite-industry-growth-satellite-industry-association-releases-the-28th-annual-state-of-the-satellite-industry-report/
[6] https://www.esa.int/Space_Safety/Space_Debris/Space_debris_by_the_numbers
[7] https://planet4589.org/space/con/star/stats.html
[8] https://www.space.com/space-exploration/satellites/is-low-earth-orbit-getting-too-crowded-new-study-rings-an-alarm-bell
[9] https://www.space.com/space-exploration/satellites/tragedy-of-the-commons-in-space-we-need-to-act-now-to-prevent-an-orbital-debris-crisis-scientists-say
> On Friday, company VP for Starlink engineering, Michael Nicolls, [2]tweeted about the incident and blamed a lack of coordination from the Chinese launch provider CAS Space. "When satellite operators do not share ephemeris for their satellites, dangerously close approaches can occur in space," he wrote, referring to the publication of predicted orbital positions for such satellites...
>
> [I]t looks like one of the satellites veered relatively close to a Starlink sat that's been in service for over two years. "As far as we know, no coordination or deconfliction with existing satellites operating in space was performed, resulting in a 200 meter (656 feet) close approach between one of the deployed satellites and STARLINK-6079 (56120) at 560 km altitude," Nicolls wrote... "Most of the risk of operating in space comes from the lack of coordination between satellite operators — this needs to change," he added.
Chinese launch provider CAS Space told PCMag that "As a launch service provider, our responsibility ends once the satellites are deployed, meaning we do not have control over the satellites' maneuvers."
And the article also cites astronomer/satellite tracking expert Jonathan McDowell, who had tweeted that CAS Space's response " [3]seems reasonable ." (In an email to PC Magazine , he'd said "Two days after launch is beyond the window usually used for predicting launch related risks."
But "The coordination that Nicolls cited is becoming more and more important," [4]notes Space.com , since "Earth orbit is getting more and more crowded."
> In 2020, for example, [5]fewer than 3,400 functional satellites were whizzing around our planet. Just five years later, that number has soared to [6]about 13,000 , and more spacecraft are going up all the time. Most of them belong to SpaceX. The company currently operates [7]nearly 9,300 Starlink satellites , more than 3,000 of which have launched this year alone.
>
> Starlink satellites avoid potential collisions autonomously, maneuvering themselves away from conjunctions predicted by available tracking data. And this sort of evasive action is quite common: Starlink spacecraft performed about [8]145,000 avoidance maneuvers in the first six months of 2025, which works out to around four maneuvers per satellite per month. That's an impressive record. But many other spacecraft aren't quite so capable, and even Starlink satellites can be blindsided by spacecraft whose operators don't share their trajectory data, as Nicolls noted.
>
> And even a single collision — between two satellites, or involving pieces of space junk, which are plentiful in Earth orbit as well — could spawn a huge cloud of debris, which could cause further collisions. Indeed, the nightmare scenario, known as [9]the Kessler syndrome , is a debris cascade that makes it difficult or impossible to operate satellites in parts of the final frontier.
[1] https://www.pcmag.com/news/spacex-alleges-a-chinese-satellite-risked-colliding-with-starlink
[2] https://x.com/michaelnicollsx/status/1999630601046097947
[3] https://x.com/planet4589/status/1999806402450362796
[4] https://www.space.com/space-exploration/satellites/spacecraft-from-chinese-launch-nearly-slammed-into-starlink-satellite-spacex-says
[5] https://sia.org/historic-number-of-launches-powers-commercial-satellite-industry-growth-satellite-industry-association-releases-the-28th-annual-state-of-the-satellite-industry-report/
[6] https://www.esa.int/Space_Safety/Space_Debris/Space_debris_by_the_numbers
[7] https://planet4589.org/space/con/star/stats.html
[8] https://www.space.com/space-exploration/satellites/is-low-earth-orbit-getting-too-crowded-new-study-rings-an-alarm-bell
[9] https://www.space.com/space-exploration/satellites/tragedy-of-the-commons-in-space-we-need-to-act-now-to-prevent-an-orbital-debris-crisis-scientists-say
Fial Frontier (Score:2)
by Tablizer ( 95088 )
> the nightmare scenario, known as the Kessler syndrome, is a debris cascade that makes it difficult or impossible to operate satellites in parts of the final frontier.
If Earth orbit is the final frontier, then we are fucked as a species. Did AI write that?
Re: (Score:2)
by geekmux ( 1040042 )
>> the nightmare scenario, known as the Kessler syndrome, is a debris cascade that makes it difficult or impossible to operate satellites in parts of the final frontier.
> If Earth orbit is the final frontier, then we are fucked as a species. Did AI write that?
No.
Kessler did.
Any day now we’ll ignorantly validate it too.
Cooperation Governments needed (Score:4, Insightful)
and.. Governments who believe that there is plenty, instead of believing in scarcity is needed. It is simply not so that if somebody else has something that you don't have it. It is not true if an immigrant has a job, then you don't have one. It is not true that if SpaceX has rockets, that Chinese can't have them. It is not a zero-sum game unless you think of it that way. A little bit of thought, and communication can bring plentiful bounty to many.
Re: (Score:1)
what do immigrants have to do with this? what are you drinking?
Re:Cooperation Governments needed (Score:4, Insightful)
Speak for yourself mate. From where I'm sitting, the Chinese look pretty sane compared to you. But keep making shrill noises and telling us how everyone you don't like is evil, I'm sure it will just turn everyone against you.
Re: (Score:3)
It's interesting that the is news. I don't recall it being a big deal when the Chinese space station had to dodge a SpaceX satellite.
Re: (Score:3)
Uh...
- China and the US both filed a brief with the UN (some it was somewhat of a big deal)
- Starlink did tell the State Department which apparently did not pass the information on (China doesn't seem to have notified the US in this case either)
- The information was apparently not passed on because it wasn't deemed a risk (bad decision) - The CSS did an anti-collision burn but the Starlink satellite also did an anti-collision burn (this satellite did not)
- The closest approach was about 1km (this satel