LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

Palomar · 2005-05-31 06:03:24

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/debris-05f.html]1 in 200 chance...

*I posted this article in the "Termination Tether" thread (Science & Technology folder) on May 27. I've decided to create a poll.

"NASA released a study earlier this year warning that the chances of the International Space Station or the Space Shuttle suffering a catastrophic accident from a collision with a piece of orbiting (man-made) space debris is only one in 200," Hitchens said.
"That's a shocking number. They hope to bring the figure down to a one in 600 chance."

--Cindy

GCNRevenger · 2005-05-31 07:05:17

Haha, even better! Why doesn't NASA start, you know, playing the Carnie's music-box tune (the kind that clowns, merry-go-rounds, and organ grinders use at canivals) when they have ISS-related press releases? Maybe the NASA spokesman could start wearing a big red nose and a frilly pointed hat?

The chance of impact is substantially increase by the attitude the ISS is flying at so it is said (across the path of most space junk), so if they just put the thing in equitorial orbit and told the Russians to hurry it up with the Soyuz pad in French Guiana, this wouldn't be such the problem.

I do find it interesting though that Mir didn't experience such an incident given how long it was up there and its orbital inclination.

Fledi · 2005-05-31 10:26:31

200 in 1 in what timeframe? If it would be some 10,000 years, then it's not that bad after all.
My guess is that the cleanup will be shared among those who use space most often, for it's in their interest that their spaceships/satellites are not hit. By the way, it's not necessarily only a negative thing to have the junk up there. The larger parts could even be recovered and recycled or used as fuel. The part in LEO will come down in a few years time anyway because of atmospheric drag, so the focus would be on MEO and GEO objects.

GCNRevenger · 2005-05-31 11:09:31

Thats 200 to 1 chance over the life of the ISS

Because the orbital velocities of space junk and the LACK of big pieces, recovering it makes no sense.

Fledi · 2005-05-31 13:16:17

Really no bigger pieces up there? Hmm I imagined there to be at least a few old satellites and kick stages up there. But you're right, it can't be that much after all.
Maybe except for all the ex-geostationary satellites placed into a graveyard orbit.

GCNRevenger · 2005-05-31 14:03:58

Old satelites aren't in low-earth orbit though, they are generally way up in GEO where we can't reach efficently (without a space elevator anyway).

Alot of the big pieces have already reenterd... if there were loads of big chunks of stuff, you'd be seeing them overhead in the night sky as a fast-moving band of dim stars that darken at the horizon.

Fledi · 2005-05-31 14:55:20

Oh I was talking about the pieces that were above LEO, the LEO junk will come down anyways. The challenge about LEO junk is to design spacecraft that are less likely to leave behind pieces of themselves.
For the GEO sats, a possible way would be to have a small tug moving the parts to a geostationary orbiting "junkyard", where they could be processed. Since they are all at the same inclination and altitude this would require only very little fuel.
But let's see how we come to LEO effectively first

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2005-07-10 06:42:23

Space debris have been recognized as a potential problem. Even though the current space debris population may not represent an immediate and excessive danger, the risk of collision with debris is continuously growing. Now is the time to take action to preserve the commercially valuable space environment for future space users

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/ESOC/SEMU2C … QWD_0.html

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish … ebris.html

How to Deal with Space Debris

Commodore · 2005-07-10 10:14:26

How much of this stuff is going to reenter after a while any way?

Start making things that don't pollute, and the bulk of the problem will probably solve itself.

Palomar · 2005-07-10 11:51:26

http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic … 3354]Voila! (edited)

*I remembered this old thread after reading Commodore's post, and managed to find it. Yep...start making items in a fashion wherein they don't pollute or can be quickly deorbited/burned up.

--Cindy

dicktice · 2005-07-11 08:36:44

You collect too much dispersed junk into one bunch out there over too long a time, and we won't have to worry about extraterrestrial sources cueing up to impact us for eons: They could be terrestrial, from presently squandered space programs! Well, maybe a stretch, but like cars and fridges, we've got to design discardance (is that a word?) into our shoots. Back when things were simpler (scifi-wise) stuff we didn't want was simply "launched into the Sun." I wonder if we aren't overlooking a possible option by ridiculing the idea out of hand. Something like retrograde thrust from a solar-mirror burner attached to the mass of nasty- or dangerous-whatever, like the asteroid-diverter I saw presented on TV last night. There's got to be a way, even if we do live in a gravity well eh?

Fledi · 2005-07-11 12:34:16

Worst thing that could happen if we don't do anything more with GEO junk than collect it is a new geostationary moon.

Imagine how exciting that would be, a sunset with two moons like in that SW ep. 4 scene

Commodore · 2005-07-11 14:01:43

Worst thing that could happen if we don't do anything more with GEO junk than collect it is a new geostationary moon.
Imagine how exciting that would be, a sunset with two moons like in that SW ep. 4 scene

"Thats no moon, thats a space station."

And those are suns by the way.

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2005-07-14 11:25:25

http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic … 3354]Voila! (edited)
*I remembered this old thread after reading Commodore's post, and managed to find it. Yep...start making items in a fashion wherein they don't pollute or can be quickly deorbited/burned up.
--Cindy

good link

srmeaney · 2005-07-27 07:37:11

Commonwealth of Space will cover the Bill, Space is our territory anyway.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-05-31 06:03:24

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#2 2005-05-31 07:05:17

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#3 2005-05-31 10:26:31

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#4 2005-05-31 11:09:31

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#5 2005-05-31 13:16:17

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#6 2005-05-31 14:03:58

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#7 2005-05-31 14:55:20

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#8 2005-07-10 06:42:23

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#9 2005-07-10 10:14:26

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#10 2005-07-10 11:51:26

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#11 2005-07-11 08:36:44

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#12 2005-07-11 12:34:16

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#13 2005-07-11 14:01:43

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#14 2005-07-14 11:25:25

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

#15 2005-07-27 07:37:11

Re: LEO Clean-Up - (Who will/should pay [$$] for it?)

Board footer