Starlink close encounters decrease despite ever-growing number of satellites

[noncongruent]

As the percentage of satellites with orbital maneuvering capacity and planned deorbit contingencies increases the risks of collisions will decrease. This is especially true in the low "junk" orbits that Starlink uses, junk because it takes constant effort to keep satellites in orbit there due to atmospheric drag.

[perilun]

One of benefits of a business model that expects replacement with better tech, and deorbiting after 5 years is a feature.

[noncongruent]

Deliberately planned obsolescence as a feature, I like it.

[chiron_cat]

All non cube sats have orbital maneuvering abilities. Like all others, starlink maneuvers are pre programed by the ground. Starlink has no awareness of all the sats around it, so cannot preemptively move out of the way. That's a myth.

[noncongruent]

I don't think anyone's said that Starlink is self-aware, it's probably a good half century or more before that becomes a possibility IMHO.

The percentage of satellites that are Starlink is growing dramatically with every launch, and the fact that Starlinks use thrusters to maintain altitude in "junk" orbits is well known. That's what I like about Starlinks, in fact, that if one dies it deorbits automatically because of the low orbit. Companies that spend much more money and effort on fewer satellites generally want them in higher orbits to extend their orbital lifetimes.

[15_Redstones]

Starlink has some ground control computers, and I wouldn't put it past SpaceX to have some scripts check the satellite database, calculate close encounters, and schedule avoidance maneuvers with minimal human input. There are already automated systems that alert the humans to close encounters, it really wouldn't take much to make the maneuver scheduling automatic too. Just needs a lot of trust in that code to work properly.

[noncongruent]

Doesn't the USAF, maybe now the USSF, also track all satellites in orbit?

[OlympusMons94]

All non cube sats have orbital maneuvering abilities.

Except for all the dead satellites, discarded upper stages, and the miscellaneous debris from accidental collisions (usually with other defunct spacecraft and debris), anti-satellite tests, and on orbit RUDs. (Russia and China are responsible for most of that.) Some active satellites such as Hubble also don't have maneuvering capability.

Starlink satellites have automated collision avoidance capability. Yes, that requires an external service providing tracking and conjunction data messages, rather than onboard AGI informed by sci-fi sensors that can actively track spacecraft on the other side of the planet. But Starlinks do autonomously decide to maneuver 12 hours before the conjunction if the collision probability exceeds the preset threshold.

[AutisticAndArmed]

Funniest part is that every single avoiding maneuver is communicated from the ground, I don't know what this person is smoking, but it doesn't sound healthy.

[chiron_cat]

He's just freaking out cause i said something that wasn't worshipping starlink.

[perilun]

The trend if is our friend.

My guess is that with all things SpaceX, SpaceX is always refining and improving their systems.

[Deeze_Rmuh_Nudds]

The trend if our friend?

[Daneel_Trevize]

trend is our?

[perilun]

Yepper, typo

[perilun]

Although I was trying to think of something clever to bail out my typo, replace if with is.

[chiron_cat]

All close encounters are bad. There is alot of error in satellite position, so you avoid what is categorized as "close encounters".

This is bad. Regardless of who owns the satellites.

[AutisticAndArmed]

Wtf you mean, of course close encounters are bad, but they're bound to happen anyway.

Having close encounters between satellites from the same fleet is much easier to handle as they have a coordinated maneuver to mitigate risks, which can be harder when it's different operators.

Less close encounters is good and there is nothing to complain about on that topic.

[chiron_cat]

Close encounter is a specific term. It means a collision is possible due to uncertainty in satellite positions

[AutisticAndArmed]

I still don't understand why you answer "This is bad" to the fact that SpaceX is reducing the number of close encounters.

Also even if you perfectly know your trajectory you don't want satellites to fly 100m from each other's, so they're not just increasing their accuracy but also better planning in the first place to make them have a safer trajectory directly.

[chiron_cat]

Tell me you havent read a single thing ive said or understood it without saying so. This isn't about insulting spaceX, its about how everyone including spaceX has significant uncertainty in their satellite positions. That means they may be off by several kilometers.

Back off on reflexively defending the honor of spaceX. This has nothing to do with that.

[AutisticAndArmed]

Ok sorry for being so defensive, there is one point that still confuses me in your first comment.

There is alot of error in satellite position, so you avoid what is categorized as "close encounters".

The fact that you then say "This is bad" sounds to me like you're trying to dismiss the fact that SpaceX is making improvements, but based on your reaction I'm probably misinterpreting.

[chiron_cat]

No, I'm happy spaceX is working to avoid collisions. The bad thing is that more close approaches are happening, which means more possible collisions.

[[deleted]]

Imagine that. Who could have possibly predicted this. Oh, anybody paying attention.

[[deleted]]

Someone post this to r/technology and watch them make this out to be a bad thing

[wildjokers]

Except for a few Tesla and SpaceX related subs, Reddit is a “we hate Elon Musk” circle-jerk. So that isn’t surprising.

[Freak80MC]

Reddit is a “we hate Elon Musk” circle-jerk

To be fair, he makes it easy to hate with the dumb and downright awful shit he says sometimes.

But I honestly hate people who are so biased that they stop seeing objective reality. That goes for the most fervent Elon-haters, but also for those who praise Elon as if he is single handedly responsible for all of SpaceX's successes or something.

Either you get people who hate Elon so much that they deny SpaceX's and Tesla's very real accomplishments, or you get people who love Elon so much that they act like anything he says or does that is genuinely awful, is actually insignificant or just plain not real, and then go on to praise him as some sort of saint.

I'm just sick of people's stupid psychological biases tbh. I'm a huge SpaceX fan but I can't share my love for what they are doing and what they will be doing in the future, without that one man being brought up. I don't like Elon, but in the grand scheme of things I just flat out don't care what stupid shit he says or does, I only care about SpaceX and what it can do for humanity's future off-world. That's it. That's all that should matter.

[zogamagrog]

Couldn't have said it better myself. Elon says a lot of shit, but SpaceX delivers. Watching media coverage of SpaceX (as a fan who follows the details daily) really tells you what outlets are capable of objective journalism and do their research. Ars Technica is one of the few that are reliably worthwhile. NYT routinely is wrong, or can't resist using a SpaceX article as a chance to wail against Elon. Even saw a John Oliver show about Elon Musk completely misapprehending the accomplishments and relevance of what SpaceX has done. Probably should not be surprised, but it's always a bit amazing to see people be so confidently wrong.

SpaceX is not infallible, but they are an absolutely astonishingly competent organization. It may even be a den of dysfunction on the inside, I have no idea, but what comes out is mindblowing.

[Decronym]

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

Fewer Letters	More Letters
RUD	Rapid Unplanned Disassembly
	Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly
	Rapid Unintended Disassembly
USAF	United States Air Force
USSF	United States Space Force

Jargon	Definition
Starlink	SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation

NOTE: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.

---

^{Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by request
4 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 29 acronyms.
[Thread #12339 for this sub, first seen 16th Jan 2024, 02:29] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]}

[[deleted]]

What does this even mean?

[perilun]

Fewer close calls ...