Musk agrees with fan that worries over orbital Starlink traffic a 'silly narrative'
- Reference: 1732545912
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2024/11/25/starlink_orbital_collision_risks/
- Source link:
The [1]claim was made on Musk's social media mouthpiece, X, on November 22, by a poster who described themselves as "All-in $TSLA since 08/2019," and stated:
There's a silly narrative being pushed that there are too many satellites in orbit, that there's some sort of orbital traffic jam and, naturally, the intent is to portray Elon Musk's SpaceX as a 'bad guy.'
The poster added: "People look at images like [2]this one and don't seem to realize these satellite dots are not to scale, they're the size of the island of Maui – We can easily 10× the number satellites in orbit and there still wouldn't be any problem."
Musk's [3]response ? "Exactly."
It makes sense for Musk to respond this way – Starlink satellites number in the thousands, and worries over overcrowding overhead would be quite inconvenient to the billionaire's plans to launch thousands more of the spacecraft to the growing broadband and direct-to-cell satellite constellation.
[4]
Certain posters on X and elsewhere using dubious data to back up their points are nothing new. In this instance, it is suggested that the scaling of dots representing satellites pushes an overcrowding narrative to paint Musk's SpaceX as "the bad guy." However, the same post also wonders why the 100,000+ ships navigating the oceans do not also cause alarm.
[5]
[6]
Maybe if those ships traveled at orbital velocity and every collision resulted in a debris field that could endanger other vessels, then perhaps there would be alarm. But we digress.
The worrying thing is Musk's response, which appears to give credence to those who deny that the Kessler syndrome is a looming problem.
[7]
The Kessler syndrome was proposed in 1978 by NASA scientists, including Donald Kessler, and suggested a scenario whereby the number of objects in Low Earth Orbit – satellites and debris – would increase to the point where collisions are more likely to occur. These collisions would create more debris, which would cause more collisions, which would create more debris, and so on.
Although atmospheric drag would eventually pull the debris back down to Earth, the rate at which debris could be created would be such that some orbits might end up inaccessible for decades.
While collisions between satellites remain relatively rare, and although the European Space Agency's Aeolus satellite had to [8]dodge one of Musk's Starlinks in 2019, the problem of smaller pieces of debris colliding is a growing one.
[9]
Chiara Manfletti, CEO of Neuraspace, commented: "The issue of space debris is not a new one nor is it one that will go away by simply doing nothing. Nor will someone else take care of the problem for us. Large defunct objects in space pose a large threat due to the possibility of fragmentation, collisions or explosions. Active objects not equipped with propulsion system and not aware of the need to maneuver also pose a threat."
Manfletti noted that scientific models "estimate the total number of space debris objects in Earth orbit to be 30,000 for sizes larger than 10 cm (including satellites), 670,000 for sizes larger than 1 cm and more than 170 million for sizes larger than 1 mm."
She added: "Any one of those poses a potential conjunction threat and might force operators to take evasive actions. The need for national safety and security and to protect critical infrastructure both in space as well as on ground, services we consider basic such as communications, financial exchanges, and transportation are at risk, and it would be catastrophic to turn a blind eye to this growing threat."
Speaking about the SpaceX offshoot specifically, Manfletti opined: "Starlink satellites maneuver an estimated 275 times per day to avoid space objects. The economic and environmental impact of not acting cannot be ignored."
Meanwhile, writing on the social media site Bluesky, space archeologist Dr Alice Gorman [10]noted , "Collision with medium to small particles of space junk happens constantly. Their number is now held to be greater than the number of natural particles, and it's growing all time. And each spacecraft explosion or fragmentation, including anti-satellite tests, increases the amount of junk."
The problem of space debris is being taken very seriously by intergovernmental bodies. The European Space Agency, for example, has a [11]Space Debris Office to coordinate research in debris modeling, predictions, and mitigation. Private companies, such as [12]Neuraspace , have been set up to assist operators with managing the issue.
[13]SpaceX closing in on approval for 25 Starship launches in 2025
[14]SpaceX claims another Starship success, but fumbles the catch
[15]FCC chair: Mobile dead spots will end when space-based and ground comms merge
[16]Testing spacecraft material the Sandia way: Setting it on fire with mirrors
While SpaceX's Starlink is not the only satellite constellation in orbit, its satellites are the most numerous, and the collision avoidance maneuvers carried out by the vehicles can be [17]measured in the tens of thousands. Starlink satellites are also deorbited at the end of their operational lives or will reenter naturally after several years if the deorbit fails.
The rate at which Musk is flinging Starlink satellites into orbit is worrying for a variety of reasons. In situations where his company is being portrayed as a "bad guy," we might suggest a good part of this could be attributed to this sort of flippant remark from Musk. Endorsing the proclamation that there shouldn't be any problem if the number of satellites in orbit went up by ten times is a textbook example. ®
Get our [18]Tech Resources
[1] https://x.com/ajtourville/status/1860080978930118758
[2] https://x.com/ajtourville/status/1860080978930118758/photo/1
[3] https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1860093034349887593
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Z0StMCqfLBQIO550D_9lbAAAAQU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z0StMCqfLBQIO550D_9lbAAAAQU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z0StMCqfLBQIO550D_9lbAAAAQU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z0StMCqfLBQIO550D_9lbAAAAQU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2019/09/02/esa_starlink/
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Z0StMCqfLBQIO550D_9lbAAAAQU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://bsky.app/profile/drspacejunk.bsky.social/post/3lbq3x7u6gs22
[11] https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Operations/Ground_Systems_Engineering/ESA_Space_Debris_Office
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/02/07/neuraspace/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2024/11/22/spacex_plans_for_25_starship/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2024/11/20/spacex_starship_success/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/29/fcc_chair_gives_a_taste/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/16/testing_spacecraft_material_the_sandia/
[17] https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-50000-collision-avoidance-maneuvers-space-safety
[18] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Elmo doesn't care...
Musk says something stupid every day so I do not bother listening to him.
There are proper adults at SpaceX who considered the implications of a mega-constellation before they started launching. The collision avoidance system was designed from the start to be automated so it could scale. It was designed to be able to communicate with operators of other constellations but so far if they plan to take advantage of this they have not made a press release that got published in main stream news.
SpaceX have already budgeted for the clean-up of their own satellites. A modern (US) launch license requires a de-orbit plan. Starlink has multiple redundant plans: start in a low orbit that will decay quickly if the satellite is a dud. Move to the operational orbit and de-orbit before the satellite runs out of propellant. The satellites do not go high enough for the Kessler sweet spot: too high and their plenty of space for things to miss each other and the orbital period is slow so it takes thousands of years for paths to cross. Too low and the satellites de-orbit passively before they have time to create a cascade.
Cleaning up other peoples' mess is legally problematic: if you deliberately push something in orbit then the consequences become your legal liability. Until this changes there is a strong incentive not to tidy up legacy hardware in orbit.
There is a possible issue with the amount of material returning to Earth. This is approaching what happens naturally and will exceed it. The consequences are not currently known and should be studied. Perhaps repair/recycle in orbit would be a better strategy than the current legally required de-orbit. Until this gets studied properly no-one knows for sure.
Re: Elmo doesn't care...
Re. "Move to the operational orbit and de-orbit before the satellite runs out of propellant".
How will Starlink deal with the debris if someone else's satellite is stationed in the same orbit, is damaged, explodes and destroys some of their satellites? Satellites that are now debris? How would they cope if some of their satellites were destroyed by meteorites, leaving debris that destroyed other satellites in the same orbit? They likely wouldn't be able to control the debris remotely, and get it to de-orbit, and a large debris field may make it difficult to launch rockets from the earth.
Re: Elmo doesn't care...
It's not just SpaceX that we need to worry about
Eutelsat OneWeb have 600 + satellites in a higher obit than Starlink
Kuiper Systems want to have 3,236 satellites into low Earth orbit.
China national satellite internet project want to have a number of satellites
We all really hate Musk, right?
Although he's the richest person in the world he actually inherited most of his wealth.
He's not even that smart. He's a big man baby. X is a cesspit (but not all the other social media sites, they are fine).
Am I doing this right?
Re: We all really hate Musk, right?
Musk makes most of his money from the valuation of Tesla Stock. Tesla in turn makes a load of money from selling Carbon Credits.
https://carboncredits.com/teslas-739-million-carbon-credit-revenue-fuels-q3-earnings-surge/
$739M according to the above article from October
And yes we hate Musk. He will gleefully take an axe to the US Government despite the fact that a lot of current Gov employees drive his cars. With them out of work who will buy Tesla's? IF you think that the Monster Truck Driving, confederate flag waving MAGA cult member is going to buy a Tesla in their hundreds of thousands... think again.
Elon has aligned himself with a party of Climate Change deniers who will if their pre election rhetoric is anything to go by, they want to cripple the EV industry which means a lot of loss of money for Musk. Drill Baby Drill'.
Re: We all really hate Musk, right?
"He will gleefully take an axe to the US Government despite the fact that a lot of current Gov employees drive his cars"
LOLZ. Lolcopter. All the LOL.
Re: We all really hate Musk, right?
4chan is that way -->
Re: We all really hate Musk, right?
The only laughing will be us laughing *at* you when all this comes ahead. It's a fact that the low IQ, and low-employed will suffer most and first.
Re: We all really hate Musk, right?
> ... Climate Change deniers ...
and there you have lost any credibility using "denier" & trying to link it to past tragic events from the 1940's ...
Re: We all really hate Musk, right?
Huh? You deny climate change, and you talk about credibility?
I guess you also believe Elvis and JFK are still alive too?
Re: We all really hate Musk, right?
Considering he is not as smart as you he seems to be doing rather well (as well as his many employees).
Re: We all really hate Musk, right?
Do you really think money equates to intelligence? Where is this meritocracy you live in?
I guess by your logic, Donald Trump is a genius, yet it's obvious to anyone that his IQ is far below average, and that's even before his age related cognitive disabilities.
Reporting needs to stop on Musk
There's nothing in it for anyone to report on what a pathological liar known to be a clueless technical illiterate has to say anything on any topic, only for him. He has vested interests in saying what he is, even if it's not true, and how could he know better anyway, when he's not an engineering or business genius, just a ruthless narciissist born into a rich family who pursued and does pursue money and power even to this day without consideration for anyone or anything than himself.
He gets his power mostly from the media reporting all his nonsense, and most of the time not even calling it out as being a nonsense.
Re: Reporting needs to stop on Musk
Pathetic!
Musk is an ideas person & he has many well thought out ideas & you can only muster criticism in response.
Re: Reporting needs to stop on Musk
It takes a special lack of intelligence to assume any criticism of someone is somehow out of jealousy. It's the sort of blind faith someone has in someone when they are in a cult.
He won't love you back, you know.
Re: Reporting needs to stop on Musk
"Funding secured", "All that is required is shareholder approval", failure to report further purchase of Twitter shares when he exceeded the quantity that requires public disclosure.
I am amazed he is not in prison for securities fraud.
Really need to question if they have a brain
Comparing to ships..... Which I think so hit each far too much when you see reports in the press
Re: Really need to question if they have a brain
Drink a coffee, reboot your brain and try that again in sentences please.
20x the number orbiting in a 500km orbit is a bit different to 20x the number in a geostaionary orbit at 36,000km because it's 72x closer.
He can't not understand that so he's deliberately trying to avoid ending up coming under any regulation.
The ironic thing is that, if he has the most satellites in orbit at that altitude, then he stands to lose the most from the inevitable Kessler Syndrome from the very literal and very real consequences of "moving fast and breaking things". Collisions are generally going to result in debris mostly at the same altitude (things knocked into eccentric orbits that move above or below that plane are more likely to intersect with the atmosphere and de-orbit), so having thousands of satellites at the same altitude suddenly doesn't seem like a great idea if you have no plan to deal with clouds of debris moving at many thousands of miles per hour.
Bugger what Musk does or doesn't understand. The FCC understands the issues and bakes reasonable precautions into their licenses.
The natural de-orbit time from 500km is about 10 years so failed satellites that cannot de-orbit themselves self-clean before they have a reasonable chance of hitting each other. The film 'Gravity' condensed Kessler syndrome by making collisions happen every orbital period. That was required to make the film exciting but it does give people a false impression of how long it takes for a cascade to build. If the orbit is low enough fragments will de-orbit before they hit something that cannot dodge.
Go up to 1000km and the natural de-orbit time is around 1000 years. Put enough satellites that high and eventually a couple of failed ones will hit each other. The working ones should be able to dodge the failures but that gets more difficult when it is thousands of fragments instead of a few dead satellites. Oneweb's considerably smaller constellation is at 1200km.
Satellites in GEO are there effectively forever. As you say, there is much more space for them to miss each other and as the orbit has a longer period it takes longer for anything to happen.
"Bugger what Musk does or doesn't understand. The FCC understands the issues and bakes reasonable precautions into their licenses."
Yet another reason why Musk went all in for Trump.
Trump has assigned as head of the FCC one of Musks mates.
[1]https://edition.cnn.com/2024/11/18/media/brendan-carr-trump-fcc-nominee-project-2025/index.html
[1] https://edition.cnn.com/2024/11/18/media/brendan-carr-trump-fcc-nominee-project-2025/index.html
He'll pay attention when physics makes it impossible for him to go become Emperor of Mars because of all the debris in the way.
Electric BS
Musk makes more pollution with one space rocket than all of his electric cars negate. How many rockets?
He Massively pollutes the air, makes cars that burn the most magnificent way, promotes mining the worst of minerals for the environment.
Musk is a politician/smiling sales person that is a plague on the planet.
I don't like him for what he does. Even changed the sky. Like Bill Gates, ego tripping wannabe dictators who knows no limit to their greed at others expense.
Elmo doesn't care...
As long as he is making money and doesn't have pay to clean up his mess...