![]() |
Spies in the sky ... India launches 104 satellites on one rocket
This is more interesting than it looks ... 90 satellites only cost $10 million to launch in one launch.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/15/w...cket.html?_r=0 Quote:
|
Hardly spies in the sky when everyone knows about them. :03:
They are called doves because they are released in orbit in flocks. |
|
Someone is going to make a killing with space garbage collection one day.
|
Why do I think of shotgun shells now...
|
Kessler Syndrome FTW!
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The kicker is that you need a base to operate from, fuel to use, personnel rotation, all that logistical fun and games. The actual garbage collection is relatively straight forward (relative within the framework of doing stuff in space itself which is already not that simple) it's more the costs and logistics which mean that it hasn't been done yet. Of course, as space tourism starts to be a thing, as soon as someones space-plane gets a hole ripped in it by part of a Soviet satellite from 1986 then clearing up space junk will suddenly become a more feasible mission. :03: |
Quote:
As most orbits are prograde of some sort, West to East, the closing speeds aren't as bad as you'd assume. A lot of the proposals are calling for large fishing net style of collection. Then they just close up the net with the junk inside of it. The real kicker is collecting the returned items. If you just let them burn up in reentry, then there's no profit to be had. Building the infrastructure to reclaim the stuff is the problem. Give the nature of the process, it will usually not be a craft that can be easily controlled during reentry, the aerodynamic forces will send it wherever it feels like. So not only will you have difficulty getting to it, finding it and hoping it didn't land somewhere populated, or deep, is a major concern. It will only become feasible when insitu (orbital) processing stations become practical, that way controlled reentry won't be as big of an issue. |
Heck, we catch something going thousands of miles an hour every time we go to the ISS which is travelling at 17,200mph. Been doing that sort of thing since Gemini VI and VII rendezvoused in 1965. It's usually a case of matching orbit, then increasing orbital velocity whilst maintaining a stable orbit (which involves thrusting at your apoapsis and periapsis) until you creep up on the object, then decrease your orbital speed until you match velocities, then thrust at the object and increase and decrease your speed to meet it.
It's a bloody hard thing to work out when you first time you try it but when you get your head around it, it's not too bad. The kicker is having everything up there in order to resupply it all, once we get a cheap and reusable way to orbit then it will get a lot easier. |
Quote:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0186566/ :):03: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
There have been some experiments using ground based lasers to clear out the larger stuff, but as August pointed out, the big stuff we know about and can avoid, its the small stuff that can really ruin your orbital day.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:30 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.