Printable View
BTW the initial constellation launched this year will be ~1500 sats. Completed the first and second set it will be 12,000. With launches never stopping because when they are up the oldest already get decomissioned and replaced after a planned lifespan of 5-7 years.
There are plans to increase the size of the constellation to 30,000 and possibly up to 50,000.
Breathing in space with moondust...
A prototype oxygen plant has been set up in the Materials and Electrical Components Laboratory of the European Space Research and Technology Centre, ESTEC, based in Noordwijk in the Netherlands.
ESA - ESA opens oxygen plant – making air out of moondust
Another Starlink launch with 60 satellites today after weather related delays for a week.
Deployment of 60 sats.
Attachment 44625
They caught one fairing half in a net. They can probably fish the other half out of the water. Those fairings are incredibly expensive. $6million a piece, $3million one half. They can almost amortize operating the ship for a year with catching one half in a year. They can reuse the one out of the water too but refurbishing it is more expensive. But there is another advantage for catching some. Fairings can become a bottleneck for launches and setting up tooling for a second production line is very expensive again.
Attachment 44626
They landed the booster too.
Attachment 44627
If Starlink is half as successful as they hope and expect, SpaceX may be more valuable than Amazon in 10 years.
I am thinking of making a dedicated thread for Starlink. High speed internet in rural Isaan maybe in 2 years. They are in full swing deploying it now.
Edit: one more pic. The fairing half under a parachute seconds before catching it. The photo is from an earlier catch.
Attachment 44630
It's getting all too cluttered up there.
NASA, Air Force satellites avoid '''alarming''' collision over Pittsburgh - Business Insider
"The larger object is an old space telescope called the Infrared Astronomical Satellite, or IRAS: a joint mission between NASA, the Netherlands, and the UK that ran out of fuel and died in November 1983."
Really, it should be passed that all fueled low-alt sats must use their last bit of fuel to reenter the atmosphere where they'll burn up.
There is a rule, that any object should be deorbited or removed to a graveyard orbit within 25 years of the end of its active service life. Unfortunately that is only a recommendation and is frequently ignored. Most stupidly ignored by operators of geostationary satellites for TV and data coverage. Those sats have a design life time and plenty of fuel to be removed to a graveyard orbit at the end of that period. But the operators just ignore that date and use the sats until they drop dead in place. Especially stupid as there is only one GEO orbit and if they clutter it with debris their business model breaks down. At GEO altitude the debris will remain forever at the time scale of human existence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luigi
The 2 sats involved in this close encounter are both really old and launched when there was no thought of debris removal. They are at an altitude where they would not deorbit for many centuries. They should be prime targets for removal with catch systems. Instead NASA and ESA toy around with systems that can remove small pieces of debris. Which is ridiculous as there are tens of thousands of these. Emphasis should be on removing satellites before they become debris.
Up to ~600km altitude the problem is not that big because objects there deorbit quite fast due to drag of the very thin atmosphere there. The ISS at 400km would deorbit quite quickly once they stop orbit raising maneuvers. The ISS with its huge mass should however be actively deorbited to an empty area, like the South Pacific. If it comes down at random it poses a risk with its huge mass.
With the coming constellations of thousands of sats like SpaceX Starlink the 25 year rule is insufficient. They need to be removed much quicker to reduce risks. The presently planned altitude of 550km would remove them through drag within 1-5 years. Still a problem but they have a planned lifetime of only 5-7 years and the capability of removing themselves at that time. So the 5 years max are only relevant for sats that die prematurely, which hopefully will be only a small percentage.
One Web constellation sats are at over 1000 km and will stay there for many thousands of years if active deorbit fails. But at least they have magnetic catch points that makes it easier to remove them at the end of their service life and they have dedicated active removal capbility.
Our prime target should be not to add more dead satellites by making sure they are removed at the end of their service life. Second remove dead satellites before they collide and produce large numbers of small debris pieces. Removing small debris is a hopeless endeavour.
You mention two of the satellite launch capable organisation, unfortunately there are also the Russian, Chinese, Japanese Indian and .... maybe others with their own satellites.Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeovers
Is there not a UN organisation which includes all of them, to manage all satellites/ debris?
NASA and ESA are the two organisations that tried to do something catching debris. I am not aware that any of the others did. But I certainly do not know everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
The UN does not have any binding authority on space debris.
I am convinced that there is no way of dealing with all the small debris pieces. Their number is huge and they are in many different orbits. The only realistic strategy is avoiding debris in the first place. Deorbit all satellites after the end of their useful life. Or in case of GEO sats move them to a graveyard orbit slightly higher than GEO. They will stay there for millions of years and if they break up they only threaten a small band above the equator.
The most threatening plans for the future are constellations higher up like 1000+km. They need to deorbit actively at 100% or they become a threat. As there is always a chance that some satellites become uncontrollable and can not deorbit by themselves there needs to be a means to remove them by external means.
A constellation at these altitudes is One Web. They provide a magnetic attach point to facilitate deorbiting dead satellites. That still needs something else to catch them. They plan to launch the first 34 operational sats next month and then launches every month. They have 6 test sats up already. 6 are not a huge threat. 1000 or several 1000 are.
SpaceX Starlink present approved plans still include a few thousand sats in that altitude range. I hope they abandon that plan and put all of their sats in lower orbits where they are deorbited by atmospheric drag if active deorbiting fails. They indicate such a change of plans on their website but have not yet followed it up by requesting change of the approved plans from the FCC, the US authority for such plans.
There are no internationally agreed regulations for such constellations in place. The FCC has placed requirements on Starlink that they made up by themselves. Reasonable requirements mostly but not backed up by any international agreements. Hopefully future permits by other organisations will recognize the rules now being set.
why not send a giant magnet strong enough to catch only those small debris :) honest question :)
All the debris is flying in its own orbit at speeds of many km/s. Also very little magnetic material there. It is aluminium and the like. They would need to match orbit with every single piece and then grab it. I don't even want to think that the pieces probably spin. Catching a whole satellite or one of the many spent upper stages there while they are spinning can be a problem all by itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonfly
just sent a missile strike to take care of that :p
The greatest leap in human, mens ability to survive in space is provided by the Brits.
It has been announced that a British invention installed on the ISS has now brought 50MBPs internet to the station and so removed a frustration for male astronauts trying to hit the vinegar stroke just as their porn stream locks. It also ensures the blokes don't get back to earth and rag their Mrs out for the first two weeks upon return, the wives however have a different concern.
A Cygnus supply ship will carry COLKa from Wallops Island in Virginia to the ISS just before 9pm UK time on Friday.
It is expected to be installed later this year outside the Columbus module, which is the ISS’s science laboratory.
The data from COLKa will be transmitted to a ground station at Harwell. From there it will be transferred to the Columbus Control Centre in Germany and other user centres across Europe.
The upgrade will ensure faster communications, independent from the Nasa system, the UK Space Agency said.
According to the European Space Agency, ColKa promises speeds of up to 50 mbps, allowing “astronauts and researchers to benefit from a direct link with Europe at home broadband speeds”.
David Kenyon, managing director at MDA Space and Robotics Limited, said: “The COLKa programme has firmly established MDA in the UK as a leading provider of high-quality space equipment, positioning us for continued business growth and new jobs in both communications and space sensor markets.”
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/uk-built-device-allow-faster-141650037.html
For those space heads out there. I listen to BBC Radio 4 quite a bit, although i think quality of programming has deteriorated, there is one programme called the "Inifinite Monkey Cage" which mixes science and a bit or comedy you may want to give a listen to...or not....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00snr0w/episodes/downloads
anyone interested in science needs to look at that new BBC series "Inside the Planets" in 4K, amazing footage
Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonfly
Is that called just 'The Planets'? They remade it in 2019.
I can't find 'Inside the planets'.
Cheers.
yes, that's the one in 2019, the subtitle in some episodes is "Inside the Planets"Quote:
Originally Posted by Luigi
not to be confused with a US version in 2017 that is said to be narrated by an annoying astronaut
make sure to watch also the 5 mini-episodes of 15min, very insightful
Cool, cheers.
The original from around 2004 is brilliant too. Hard to beat the BBC when it comes to such documentaries.
since 2004, a lot of new discoveries, and Prof. Brian Cox does a good job explaining those newly found discoveries
some fooking amazing stuff, it seems we were wrong about of a lot of things
yes hard to beat the BBC,
Yup, not to mention the development in resolution.
Downloading it again now. :)
https://teakdoor.com/the-multimedia-...ts#post4019849
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxMohurmlMU
in 4K, that looks nice :)
Earth has a new mini-moon after a 3.5 meter asteroid has been temporarily captured by Earth's gravity.
New mini-moon discovered orbiting Earth - but it's only temporary | Science & Tech News | Sky News
Has been there for 3 years. :)
Not sure how far out is its orbit, or how long it will hang about, with plans to capture an asteroid and to bring it into orbit at around one Lunar Distance, hopefully it will be hanging around.
it could crash on Earth, and bring a new kind of Coronavirus :p
The nearby Kepler belt seems to have a thousands of those waiting to crash on earth, or Jupiter, or the Sun, depending on their position and who the fuck knows what else :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonfly
Minor nitpick. I assume that you mean the Kuiper belt which lies just beyond Pluto? Yes that't a likely origin of a potential planet cracking asteroid.
right, pronunciation sounded like Kepler :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Takeovers
Today the 20ieth and last launch of SpaceX Dragon 1 for ISS resupply has successfully launched. Future resupply missions will use the new Dragon 2 which was developed for crew. Dragon was deployed and is scheduled to reach the ISS in 2 days.
The launch
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2020/03/216.jpg
The booster landed back at Cape Canaveral. The 50iest successful booster landing, a great achievement.
They sure have cute lead engineers at SpaceX. She was the host of todays launch coverage. They don't hire media professionals, they let their engineering staff do the job.
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2020/03/217.jpg
like they used to do in the early days of the Apollo mission,
you must watch that documentary HD re-mastered of the Apollo Mission 11, with undisclosed footage, gives a whole new dimension to the first moon mission, and the original accompanying speech during the footage has the right tone and the information to make it exciting. Loved the beep thing in all communication exchanges.
Any danger of you sharing the name or link?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonfly
^ Apollo 11 (2019) on your favorite torrent site
just checked, netflix doesnt have it. will torrent, cheers.
I think we posted the link in the Documentary thread, search for "Armstrong", that's how I got the Apollo 11 mission on x1337
Space Center Houston gets a Falcon 9 booster for display. It is an older previously flown booster.
YouTube
It is horizontal for now. It may be raised vertical later. Like the one they have installed at their factory in Hawthorne, California, near Los Angeles. Also a pre flown booster but they painted it fresh. They no longer do that, they fly them again with the soot from previous flights.
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2020/03/261.jpg
They could at least let the work experience boy wash them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeovers
Letting them fly as is is a statement on reuse.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealKW
Also the soot enabled Matt Desch, CEO of Iridium, to write something on the body of a rocket with his fingers. Before it launched their next Iridium satellites into orbit. :)
The next generation of Spacex rockets, Starship and the booster Superheavy, are made of steel, not painted and they use methane as propellant which should not cause any sooting. No time to clean those. The declared goal is that they are capable to refly 1 hour after landing.
Wow. Serious work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeovers
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRealKW
It is an aspirational goal. It will need years of optimization. The biggest obstacle is the engines. Rocket engines were previously 1 use and then drop into the ocean, or on villages in the case of China. Now they need to refly without as much as a checkout except for reading sensor data.
Raptor, the most complex engine ever designed. The engine with extremes in pressure and in efficiency. Cost per engine right now below $1million, planned to go down to $250,000 or less. Compared to $25million or more for the engine that will drive the NASA/Boeing SLS rocket. Sure SLS needs 4 engines and the much more capable Starship superheavy needs 30+ engines.
Full power from all of them is going to be a challenge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeovers
What is the minimum number required to be launch committed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
We don't have numbers. But to reach the fast launch rate they will need to be able to launch safely with one or a few engines out of order. Though they need to be extremely reliable.
Sea Launch command ship arrives in Russia from US
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2020/03/982.jpg
The Sea Launch Commander command ship, which left the United States at the end of February, has arrived in Slavyanka in the Primorsky Territory in Russia's Far East, according to global ship-tracking website MarineTraffic: Global Ship Tracking Intelligence | AIS Marine Traffic.
The ship left the port of Long Beach near Los Angeles on 28 February.
The Sea Launch Commander is a mobile maritime spaceport, designed to launch commercial payloads near the equator using specially-made rockets.
The vessel, along with the Odyssey launch platform, is a part of the Sea Launch project, developed as a joint venture of companies from Russia, Ukraine, the US and Norway in 1995.
The project was used to deploy nearly three dozen commercial satellites into orbit between 1999 and 2014. In 2014, the joint venture was abandoned. In April 2018, the project was purchased by the private Russian airline and aerospace company S7 Group.
In 2019, Roscosmos head Dmitry Rogozin stated that the Sea Launch vessels could be relocated to Russian Far East's Sovetskaya Harbour to launch the Soyuz-5, a new rocket, being developed by the Progress Rocket Space Centre.
Sea Launch command ship arrives in Russia from US
NASA is planning a space station around the moon as a staging point for lunar landings, the lunar gateway. I am not going to comment on that plan as such because I could not do that without being rude. :sssh:
But I like it when SpaceX can make money from it while they design and build their own architecture. :)
NASA has issued a RFP, a request for proposal to deliver cargo to the gateway. SpaceX has proposed a vehicle they call Dragon XL. It is a new design but uses a lot of components they have developed for their crew Dragon. A nice video of Scott Manley mostly about Dragon XL. Ignore the rest. It is mostly obsolete.
YouTube
The video was made very early after the announcement and it has a few inaccuracies. One is the needed delta-v. We don't have precise numbers on it but the cargo vehicle does not need to go fast. There are slow trajectories that require very little delta-v from the cargo vehicle. The slow trajectories still need the same or even slightly higher delta-v from the launch vehicle but the cargo vessel can fly with very little propellant. Another is that Scott Manley mentioned a trunk, or frunk as he calls it. Dragon XL does not have that, the vacuum cargo is mounted outside on the vehicle without any cover.
The plan had been to select 2 proposals for the service but they ended up contracting only SpaceX with Dragon XL.
There were 4 proposals, SpaceX, Northrup Grumman with a variant of the Cygnus cargo vessel that delivers to the ISS already, Sierra Nevada who are scheduled to deliver cargo to the ISS with their Dreamchaser winged vehicle, and a proposal by Boeing.
Boeing was eliminated even before detailed evaluation because their proposal was not only the most expensive by far, it also failed on a variety of technical and contractual requirements.
Northrup Grumman was slightly better than Sierra Nevada but more expensive. The two proposals were both considered adequate and reasonably priced.
SpaceX Dragon XL was the cheapest by far and it was also the best and most capable design by far. So NASA selected only this one, with an option to revisit the decision later and select a second provider.