Date: 7/12/2016 06:13:47
From: monkey skipper
ID: 992962
Subject: Space Junk

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-06/space-junk-why-it-is-coming-back-to-bite-us/7884396

Space junk: How big is the problem and what are we going to do about it?

Few humans have ever stepped foot in space but as a species we’ve already managed to make a mess of Earth’s backyard. Space junk from satellites and rockets is crowding out spacecraft and telecommunication satellites in Earth’s orbit, and putting humans at risk.

It’s a big problem, and getting bigger every day.

We explain just how big the problem is, and what we’re going to do about it.
Collisions are a major source of space junk
Orbits and what you’ll find there

Low Earth Orbit: Remote sensing satellites are commonly found here orbiting at about 500 to 600 kilometres above the ground. Medium Earth orbit: Typically you’ll find GPS satellites here orbiting around 2,000 kilometres above the ground. Geostationary (‘Geo’) Orbit: Home to communication satellites, orbiting 35,000 kilometres up.

Most space junk comes from orbiting satellites and the rockets that shot them into place. Gradual wear and tear or sudden collisions cause these to disintegrate into tiny fragments that continue to orbit at tens of thousands of kilometres an hour.

In 2007, China tested an anti-satellite missile by shooting it at one its old satellites, adding nearly 3,500 extra fragments in the area between 160 kilometres and 2,000 kilometres above the surface of our planet.

“That was a significant spike in the amount of space junk out there,” said space researcher Professor Russell Boyce of the University of New South Wales, Canberra and the Australian Academy of Science.

And in 2009, a defunct Cosmos satellite crashed into a functioning Iridium communication satellite, adding thousands more pieces of debris.
Even the tiniest bits of space junk can cause damage

At last count there were over 20,000 pieces of space junk larger than a softball, and about 500,000 larger than a marble orbiting Earth.

Scientists say there are many millions more too small to be seen and the number is growing all the time.

Even the tiniest fragments can cause damage — according to NASA flecks of paint led to a number of space shuttle windows having to be replaced.

It has even been suggested that at some stage the sheer number of bits of space junk will cause a “cascade” of collisions and could render an orbit unusable.
Avoiding space junk collisions is easier said than done

NASA regularly monitors what they call “orbital debris” and try to move their spacecraft out of its way or shield against it.

But, believe it or not, it’s easier to predict the pathway of an object en route to Mars than that of an orbiting piece of space junk.

There are all kinds of things that can affect its orbit ranging from weird and wonderful gravitational anomalies to the effects of the Earth’s magnetic field and even light reflected from the planet and the Sun.

It is not surprising then, that predictions of whether two orbiting objects will collide can be wrong.

Take the collision between the Cosmos and Iridium satellites in 2009: “They were supposed to miss by half a kilometre and they didn’t,” Professor Boyce says.

Space junk can hang around for centuries

While satellites are only built to last a decade or so at most, they can hang around for much longer.

Space junk only returns to Earth when it is slowed down enough by the drag of the atmosphere.

Since the atmosphere gets thinner the further out from Earth you get, space junk higher up generally takes longer to come down of its own accord, and some of it will be up there for centuries.

Historically there has been little thought paid to what happens to satellites once they’re shot up into space.

Only now, some governments — notably the French — are insisting any new satellites must be programmed to come down within 25 years so they don’t contribute to the growing space junk problem.
Junk in ‘graveyard orbit’ coming back to haunt

To counter the problem of colliding space junk, the UN Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space has declared that dead rockets and satellites should be parked in a “graveyard orbit” a bit further out than the geostationary orbit used by communications satellites.

The theory was they wouldn’t fall into lower, more congested, orbits — at least not for a very long time. Well that was the theory…

“Already after a decade or two they are drifting back through the geo belt and creating havoc and nightmare for satellite operators,” Professor Boyce says.

Australia could play a key role in space traffic management

The sheer volume of space junk makes reducing it difficult. This has led to research into what’s called “space situational awareness”, which is all about avoiding collisions.

“We have to develop a space traffic management system so we can constantly monitor everything and constantly give updates to satellites to move out of the way of things,” Professor Boyce says.

Because Australia looks out on a large part of space that can’t be seen by other parts of the world, it provides a critical part of the global surveillance network that is needed for this, he said.
The future: space fences, mini-satellite swarms and space tow trucks

Scientists are working on some pretty out-there technologies to complement the space traffic management system of the future. Here are a few ideas:

Space harpoons to fire from one satellite to another to tow it out of the way to a safer orbit; Robotic arms and nets to help remove debris; Better radar-based ‘space fences’ to detect space junk; Networked swarms of autonomous miniaturised satellites to collect data and help manage space traffic. The nifty thing about these is that they would be programmed to get out the way of things so as to not contribute to congestion themselves. But if one of the swarm did get taken out in a collision the rest could continue the job.

Meanwhile … watch out for falling space junk!

Even though space junk can stay in orbit for a long time, when it does start to fall back to Earth it usually does so in an uncontrolled way, Professor Boyce says.

Luckily, most objects are small enough to burn up and vaporise as they fall through the atmosphere — but not all.

This is why scientists try to deliberately program larger objects into a deep-dive down through the atmosphere over the ocean.

The problem is our limited understanding of how space junk behaves means even the best-laid plans can go awry, which is why we got bits of SkyLab and the Mir Space Station landing in random places on Earth.

Right now, scientists are trying to figure out how best to deal with the giant Earth observation spacecraft called Envisat that stopped communicating in April 2012.

The 26-metre-long satellite has been described as a “ticking bomb” and is one of the largest space junk threats in low Earth orbit.

Reply Quote

Date: 7/12/2016 07:38:20
From: roughbarked
ID: 992967
Subject: re: Space Junk

We need the space truckers towing company.

Drag it all into safer orbits.

Reply Quote

Date: 7/12/2016 13:55:31
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 993065
Subject: re: Space Junk

Nothing much new in the original post.

> It’s a big problem, and getting bigger every day.

Not every day. Most days the problem gets less. A lot of space junk is either in a deliberate graveyard orbit, or the orbit decays until the space junk burns up in the upper atmosphere. Even dropped Hasselblads and urine droplets stay in predictable corridors.

> Collisions are a major source of space junk

False. It could be in future but there’s only ever been one collision that generated space junk. The main source of space junk that still causes problems is the deliberate explosion of the Chinese satellite. The spread of this shrapnel has threatened, among other things, the Hubble Space Telescope.

Low Earth Orbit: Remote sensing satellites are commonly found here orbiting at about 500 to 600 kilometres above the ground. Medium Earth orbit: Typically you’ll find GPS satellites here orbiting around 2,000 kilometres above the ground. Geostationary (‘Geo’) Orbit: Home to communication satellites, orbiting 35,000 kilometres up.
Most space junk comes from orbiting satellites and the rockets that shot them into place. Gradual wear and tear or sudden collisions cause

> In 2007, China tested an anti-satellite missile by shooting it at one its old satellites, adding nearly 3,500 extra fragments in the area between 160 kilometres and 2,000 kilometres above the surface of our planet.

Yes.

> NASA regularly monitors what they call “orbital debris” and try to move their spacecraft out of its way or shield against it.

The best tracking and monitoring is done in France. But all agencies share information.

> It is not surprising then, that predictions of whether two orbiting objects will collide can be wrong.

Yes.

> Take the collision between the Cosmos and Iridium satellites in 2009: “They were supposed to miss by half a kilometre and they didn’t.

I didn’t know that.

Etc.

Reply Quote

Date: 7/12/2016 14:13:03
From: Peak Warming Man
ID: 993080
Subject: re: Space Junk

In the London Science museum they have a wall size electronic display showing all the satellites orbiting the earth.
It’s impressive.

Reply Quote

Date: 7/12/2016 14:16:49
From: bob(from black rock)
ID: 993081
Subject: re: Space Junk

Peak Warming Man said:


In the London Science museum they have a wall size electronic display showing all the satellites orbiting the earth.
It’s impressive.

Who provides the traffic management services to prevent crashes?

Reply Quote

Date: 7/12/2016 14:18:24
From: Tamb
ID: 993082
Subject: re: Space Junk

bob(from black rock) said:


Peak Warming Man said:

In the London Science museum they have a wall size electronic display showing all the satellites orbiting the earth.
It’s impressive.

Who provides the traffic management services to prevent crashes?
The Celestial Mechanic.

Reply Quote

Date: 7/12/2016 17:41:50
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 993197
Subject: re: Space Junk

> Envisat

Polar orbit at altitude 770 km.

“Given Envisat’s orbit and its area-to-mass ratio, it will take about 150 years for the satellite to be gradually pulled into the Earth’s atmosphere. Envisat is currently orbiting in an environment where 2 catalogued objects can be expected to pass within about 200 m (660 ft) of it every year, which would likely trigger the need for a maneuver to avoid a possible collision. A collision between a satellite the size of Envisat and an object as small as 10 kg could produce a very large cloud of debris”.

Because Envisat is uncontactable, it can’t be manoeuvred out of the way of the catalogued space junk objects.

Envisat is a candidate for a mission to remove it from orbit, called e.Deorbit. The spacecraft sent to bring down Envisat would itself need to have a mass of approximately 1.6 tonnes.

Reply Quote

Date: 7/12/2016 17:46:17
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 993200
Subject: re: Space Junk

> Envisat … e.Deorbit

“Capture will be conducted in one of two ways: either by using mechanical tentacles or nets. The tentacles option includes equipping the spacecraft with robotic arms, one of which will first capture a holding point, before the remaining arms embrace the derelict and secure it with a clamping mechanism. The net option includes equipping the spacecraft with a deployable net on a tether, that will envelope the target derelict before the spacecraft will begin changing orbit.”

Reply Quote

Date: 7/12/2016 18:10:45
From: CrazyNeutrino
ID: 993216
Subject: re: Space Junk

> Collisions are a major source of space junk
False. It could be in future but there’s only ever been one collision that generated space junk. The main source of space junk that still causes problems is the deliberate explosion of the Chinese satellite. The spread of this shrapnel has threatened, among other things, the Hubble Space Telescope.

The Chinese should clean up that debris field, since it was they who created it.

Reply Quote

Date: 7/12/2016 18:14:01
From: Cymek
ID: 993217
Subject: re: Space Junk

CrazyNeutrino said:


> Collisions are a major source of space junk
False. It could be in future but there’s only ever been one collision that generated space junk. The main source of space junk that still causes problems is the deliberate explosion of the Chinese satellite. The spread of this shrapnel has threatened, among other things, the Hubble Space Telescope.

The Chinese should clean up that debris field, since it was they who created it.

Prelude to invasion when they take out all US spy satellites.

Reply Quote

Date: 9/12/2016 15:05:54
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 993951
Subject: re: Space Junk

CrazyNeutrino said:


> Collisions are a major source of space junk
False. It could be in future but there’s only ever been one collision that generated space junk. The main source of space junk that still causes problems is the deliberate explosion of the Chinese satellite. The spread of this shrapnel has threatened, among other things, the Hubble Space Telescope.

The Chinese should clean up that debris field, since it was they who created it.

They should never have created it in the first place. But now it’s impossible to collect 950 prices of debris larger than 10 cm, all in different orbits. This is already a lot smaller than the original debris generated by the explosion, I think, as many pieces would have burnt up in the Earth’s atmosphere.

Reply Quote

Date: 9/12/2016 15:06:49
From: roughbarked
ID: 993954
Subject: re: Space Junk

mollwollfumble said:


CrazyNeutrino said:

> Collisions are a major source of space junk
False. It could be in future but there’s only ever been one collision that generated space junk. The main source of space junk that still causes problems is the deliberate explosion of the Chinese satellite. The spread of this shrapnel has threatened, among other things, the Hubble Space Telescope.

The Chinese should clean up that debris field, since it was they who created it.

They should never have created it in the first place. But now it’s impossible to collect 950 prices of debris larger than 10 cm, all in different orbits. This is already a lot smaller than the original debris generated by the explosion, I think, as many pieces would have burnt up in the Earth’s atmosphere.

Sounds like me talking about eradicating ryegrass.

Reply Quote