all 11 comments

[–]Zapped 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

More than 30,000 artificial objects are orbiting our planet, of which only about 5,000 are functioning, according to the ESA's Space Debris Office.

I wonder how much satellite-to-satellite warfare is going on?

[–]BravoVictor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We have always been at war with the Ort cloud.

[–]Smarterthanlastweek2 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

This is very cool! It sounds like they're boosting the junk to a higher orbit though which I don't see the point off. Why net de-orbit it?

many other countries have launched or are currently developing technologies to clear space junk.

Didn't know this either. Will definitely be looking into it!

[–]BravoVictor 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

sounds like they're boosting the junk to a higher orbit

Yeah, you're right. I had to research it. I think this illustrates why.

These are satellites in high geostationary orbit. If they push them towards Earth, where even more satellites orbit, that increases the risk of them hitting something. So they're nudged slightly further away from Earth where there's less chance of a collision.

Does seem strange and short sighted though, since the "graveyard" orbit will eventually get too cluttered as well.

[–]Smarterthanlastweek2 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Does seem strange and short sighted though, since the "graveyard" orbit will eventually get too cluttered as well.

Exactly. I guess as long as you can turn it into someone else's problem years in the future, it's a success?

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

A Chinese satellite was spotted in late January grabbing another long-dead satellite and days later throwing it into a "graveyard" orbit 300 km away, where objects are less likely to hit spacecraft.

Really? Forces applied to equal and opposite directions should throw the thrower... 300 km closer to earth. Assuming similar masses.

They show an image of a 4-fingered robot hand in the article. It's about to grab a satellite.

How is this armless hand expected to throw anything?

[–]Masterblaster 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Nice catch! Maybe the whole story is fake..

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm a huge fan of space. The earth is round.

But...

Rocket Science Proves Rockets Do Not Go Into 'Space'

This evidence cannot be debunked, because it reflects reality.
Regrettably. :-(

This explains why every live space launch is near an ocean, and the rocket flies off into the horizon.

Try to find a video where's rocket flies straight up and into space.
If you have one, then I'd like to see it.

I don't like it either. Facts are facts.

I'm not discounting the possibility of other classified methods of space travel.
I can't prove they don't work.

[–]Smarterthanlastweek2 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I expect that was just poetic license, and they used a rocket engine to boost the two now joined satellites.

[–]Zapped 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It sounded like the cleaner-upper satellite grabbed the old, dead satellite and drug it towards the "graveyard". After they were moving, it then let go and returned to its own orbit. The old one kept travelling until it reached the "graveyard".

[–]iDontShift 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

satellites are balloons.

they do not exist in the thermalsphere, that would be impossible

but that is what is claimed

the stupidity by which people think things are is annoyingly lazy information gathers