all 5 comments

[–]magnora7[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Wow, two satellites directly collided? And a satellite has a 50% chance of being hit by something over 1cm in size, every year? Jeez. I didn't realize this was such a prevalent issue

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

Oh, yeah. It's been bad and getting worse for years. I wouldn't wanna be an astronaut who had to go outside.

[–]magnora7[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah they mentioned the percentage of being hit per year went from like 35% to 50% in just the last few years because there's so much junk floating around now. Even a 0.2mm paint speck is enough to cause a chip in a window.

But they also showed that almost all the debris from a launch comes back down to earth within 24 months, so that's good at least.

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

funny how they don't ever mention that the US also shot down satellites to test anti satellite rockets.

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

once of the reasons the moon landing was faked. so much junk is already up there from millions of years of astroids/metroes it's llike flying through very fast moving buckshot.