Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space

Over A Dozen Satellites From SpaceX's December Launch Can't Be Identified (theverge.com) 52

In December a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket deployed 64 satellites into space. But four months later, more than a dozen "have yet to be identified in space," reports the Verge. "We know that they're up there, and where they are, but it's unclear which satellites belong to which satellite operator on the ground...."

"Many of the satellite operators do not know which of these 19 probes are theirs exactly, and the Air Force can't figure it out either." For a good portion of these satellites, it's possible that they have experienced some kind of technical problem, preventing the operators from contacting the spacecraft in orbit. But part of the identification issue stems from the SSO-A "SmallSat Express" mission's structure. This was a rocket ride-share, a type of launch that's become popular in the industry. As satellites grow smaller, operators can pack a bunch of these tiny probes together on larger launch vehicles, sending them into space all at once. But with so many satellites going into orbit at the same time, it can be hard for the Air Force's technology to distinguish the satellites from each other. And that, in turn, can make it hard for satellite operators to decipher which satellites are theirs...

Not knowing the exact location of a spacecraft is a major problem for operators. If they can't communicate with their satellite, the company's orbiting hardware becomes, essentially, space junk. It brings up liability and transparency concerns, too. If an unidentified satellite runs into something else in space, it's hard to know who is to blame...

One problem is that most of the spacecraft on board all look the same. Nearly 50 satellites on the SSO-A launch were modified CubeSats -- a type of standardized satellite that's roughly the size of a cereal box. That means they are all about the same size and have the same general boxy shape. Plus, these tiny satellites are often deployed relatively close together on ride-share launches, one right after the other. The result is a big swarm of nearly identical spacecraft that are difficult to tell apart from the ground below.

"It's possible that some of the owners of the unidentified satellite got in touch with their vehicles recently and just have not informed the Air Force where they are," the article acknowledges. But Jonathan McDowell, an astrophysicist at Harvard and spaceflight tracker, points out to the Verge that five of the 13 satellites launched on an Electron rocket in December are still unidentified -- as are eight of the 72 satellites deployed on a Russian Soyuz rocket in 2017.

And four months after its launch in December, the web site for Trevor Paglen's "Orbital Reflector" art project (deploying a giant reflective balloon that can be seen from Earth) is still giving visitors this discouraging message.

"Due to the large number of satellites aboard #SSOA, the satellite tracking information is taking longer than we originally anticipated..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Over A Dozen Satellites From SpaceX's December Launch Can't Be Identified

Comments Filter:
  • Tech fail (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 06, 2019 @06:50PM (#58396276)

    Sounds like a lot of overzealous tech startups jumped on the cubesat hypetrain since it was a pricepoint they could afford. Unfortunately they didnt understand they couldn't deliver broken software and expect patches after the fact to fix their problems like they do with web 2.0 garbage.

  • Seems like there needs to be a standard for identification much like we have for aircraft. Even more so really, given aircraft arenâ(TM)t going to be in flight for years.

    • I almost can't believe they don't have transponders. Almost.
      • Re:ADSB in space (Score:5, Informative)

        by Chrontius ( 654879 ) on Saturday April 06, 2019 @10:26PM (#58396824)
        ADS transponders can be made down to 500 grams. That's half the mass budget for a 1u cubesat. But the smallest transponder I could find [airplanegear.com] has a power output of 130 watts. Typical cubesats have a power budget of about 2 watts for communications, per Wikipedia (and 130 watts is the maker's idea of "low power consumption").

        "Because of tumbling and low power range, radio-communications are a challenge. Many CubeSats use an omnidirectional monopole or dipole antenna built with commercial measuring tape."

        That's not really gonna fly...
      • Possibly classified projects from other agencies where the Air Force has no "Need to Know".

        There are enough other agencies - some in competition with the DoD - that they may intentionally be keeping the Air Force out of the loop.

  • Somebody should have written their MAC addresses down before rocket launch... ^_^'

  • by Ozoner ( 1406169 ) on Saturday April 06, 2019 @07:20PM (#58396370)

    This whole story doesn't make sense. The question is "can they communicate?".

    The Amateur Radio Community routinely communicate with clusters of satellites,
    it doesn't matter that there are a bunch of them in essentially the same orbit.
    The antennas used have a fairly wide beam-width, so accurate pointing is not necessary.

    However over time the bunch spreads out, so it becomes easier to identify individual satellites.

    And if the satellites were not intended to communicate, what are they used for?

    • The amateur radio community can only communicate with them if the frequencies are public. A bunch of these cubesats are for commercial operators
      who (a) don't want to make their comms public and (b) aren't using the amateur satellite frequency band. Some of the others are using the amateur bands,
      and the lack of contact probably means they just failed to operate.

      Inadequate ground station design and inadequate satellite transmitter design are surprisingly common cubesat failure modes.

      • by Ozoner ( 1406169 )

        > The amateur radio community can only communicate with them if the frequencies are public

        Obviously I was talking about Amateurs communicating with Amateur satellites.

        And likewise Commercial entities communicating with Commercial satellites.

        What is your point? We still don't know if anyone is communicating with them.

    • http://stuffin.space/?search=2... [stuffin.space] Yeah, the operators can certainly distinguish them provided they are working, just point an antenna on possible candidates until you get a communication with one that's yours. But with say Object BE and BD, even though you can tell which satellites they are, you can't tell which one is which one. If they have communications and GPS on board, they can tell you their orbits themselves, but if that's not the case, good luck figuring out which is which. Sats that have failed, y
    • by jwdb ( 526327 )

      This whole story doesn't make sense. The question is "can they communicate?".

      Not necessarily.

      And if the satellites were not intended to communicate, what are they used for?

      See Landsat, the Jason series, the GPM core observatory, or Planet's cubesats, just off the top of my head. None of these are about comms. Generally they're observing either the atmosphere or the surface, and for a plethora of different possible reasons related to science, public policy, disaster relief, etc. These satellites do communica

  • They are a bunch of spacists; all satellites look the same to them.

  • Surely they should be independent modules on one larger, easier to manage and de-orbit satellite. The backbone could provide power and navigation. Given that all these cubes are going in the same orbit anyway.

  • And there were recent Slashdot articles talking about companies launching thousands more of them...
    • The point of the LEO internet fleets don't have to be identified from the ground. Hit any of them with the signal, then let them work out the route between themselves. (As opposed to current satellite internet where you do have to hit a specific satellite precisely with a directional antenna.)

  • by FeelGood314 ( 2516288 ) on Saturday April 06, 2019 @09:43PM (#58396746)
    The owners of these satellites don't care which one is which in the tracking info, the air force really doesn't either. CubeSats are small, almost anyone can have one launched if you pay a little and follow some simple rules - https://xkcd.com/1992/ [xkcd.com]

    Cubsats are primarily used for proving a technology, zero g experiments and sometime measuring something. You send it up, it does its thing, it reports back the results and then it burns up in the atmosphere. As long as I know generally where in the sky it is I don't need to care which one it is. It will be in its little posy of other cubsats that rode the same rocket up and that's good enough.
  • Place your nations spy satellite behind the many new satellite systems and detect what type of data is been sent up for earth.
    Where on earth too.
    Encrypted and complex mission work? Mission is working and very successful.
    Diagnostic communications? Mission might be successful one day.
    Repeated attempts for any communications?

    Dont have that kind of advanced spy satellite network with lots of extra fuel?
    Place generations of spies into the US education system. Let them get work in the space sector.
  • by Gabest ( 852807 ) on Sunday April 07, 2019 @02:54AM (#58397406)
    Give them a number and record which belongs to who on a piece of paper.
  • by cstacy ( 534252 ) on Sunday April 07, 2019 @03:54AM (#58397526)

    This is a perfect application for blockchain!

Some people manage by the book, even though they don't know who wrote the book or even what book.

Working...