Starlink satellites responsible for over half of close encounters in orbit | Hacker News Reader

Starlink satellites responsible for over half of close encounters in orbit

space.com

21 pointsalex_young5 comments

Close encounters with their own satellites

“The current 1,600 close passes include those between two Starlink satellites. Excluding these encounters, Starlink satellites approach other operators’ spacecraft 500 times every week.”

Seriously, this article reads like it was written and sponsored by Blue Origin.

Two starlink satellites colliding because of a bit more "move fast and break things" attitude than traditional space companies is still a disaster for everyone. Because you end up with debris that is unpredictable and dangerous to other satellites.

I'm sure Starlink tries their best, but I've also seen more than just this one article about how they're not always great at it.

so pr campaigns can be aggressive?

I’m not too familiar with the intricacies of each major orbital tranche beyond their name: LEO, GEO, NEO etc. Similar to how the FCC in the USA divides bands on the spectrum for wireless devices can we not sub-divide tranches like LEO into N components and majorly fine those whose satellites deviate?

I suspect its a lot more complicated than that but if anyone knows anything please share.

> can we not sub-divide tranches like LEO into N components and majorly fine those whose satellites deviate?

Not realistically. Jurisdiction aside (are you going to fine Russian, Chinese, Indian etc satellites for not respecting US rules?) this would restrict allowable orbits beyond reason. They would all have to be circular and at the same inclination (within each "shell", defined by its altitude), or they would inevitably cross each other. You could try to define some fixed volumes where crossings are allowed, but that would only add a small subset of orbits (sun-synchronous, unless the crossing volumes are allowed to move around relative to Earth's surface) and concentrate collision risk into those volumes - and increase it, since average distances would be correspondingly smaller.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com