Hacker News Reader

It's space junk and then it enters the atmosphere and burns up, I don't think it's too hard to figure out.

If it turns out the junk truly disintegrates without any significant affect to the atmosphere then GP is saying that it’s not actually a problem and not actually “junk”. Space junk usually refers to stuff junking up things in the same way a rusted out sedan ruins a yard.

If the sedan disappeared it wouldn’t really be considered junk. If the sedan disappeared but left behind a puddle of poison the label would still apply.

Well it’s definitely junk or waste or garbage from the moment you are unable to use it or reclaim it. It so happens in the case of starlink satellites that we don’t have to burn that trash, it burns itself. If you want to say space junk is just the stuff stuck up there that’s fine, but there’s a short period of time where Starlink satellites are both in space and are junk.

The typical meaning of space junk is stuff orbiting around without the ability to control itself and without de-orbiting, therefore presenting a risk/nuisance to other things in orbit.

Is a Starlink sat that reaches EOL and sets itself on trajectory for rapid de-orbit ever junk by such a definition?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com