Europe's Space Agency Will Destroy a Brand-New Satellite in 2027 Just To See What Happens (theverge.com) 19
The European Space Agency (ESA) plans to launch a satellite into Earth's orbit in 2027 to watch it get wrecked as it reenters the atmosphere. From a report: The project is intended to help understand how exactly satellites break apart so that scientists can learn how to prevent the creation of more space debris. Space junk is becoming a bigger problem as we send more satellites into orbit, but there are efforts to try and address it. This mission is part of the ESA's Zero Debris Charter initiative to stop the creation of additional space debris by 2030. The mission is called the Destructive Reentry Assessment Container Object (DRACO), and the insides of the satellite will collect data as the craft gets destroyed during reentry into the atmosphere. It will also contain a 40-centimeter capsule designed to survive the destruction that will transmit the collected data as the capsule moves toward the ocean.
Re:create more space junk... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:create more space junk... (Score:5, Informative)
They seem to be worried about the junk that reaches the ground. Their plan is to try to instrument different parts of a typical satellite, like the solar panels, fuels tanks, and other components, and collect data on them at least down to 60km altitude.
Probably a good idea since we are now putting up thousands of these things, with apparently little data on what parts survive for how long, either disintegrating in the upper atmosphere (and releasing various chemicals) or reaching the ground. Operators usually try to ditch in the sea, but the more we put up the higher the chances of one coming down over land.
Re: create more space junk... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't zero-G toilet seats just keep floating in the air? I am not a specialist...
Too many of them floating around in the air could become a hazard for airplanes so install solar-powered transponders on them I guess...
Air traffic control to pilot: "Be aware of your proximity to zero-G toilet seat #4672345 so please advise!"
But global warming academics most affected (Score:1)
The energy and pollution needed to plan, research, build the materials for, build the satellite, launch it into space, and the same for what is going to be used to destroy the satellite is conveniently ignored by the scientific community because all of this is in the name of more science.
This is the same as burning down a high rise office tower to scientifically study the effect of heat on glass office windows.
Want this entire mission to be subject to the same environmental impact study, protests by environ
Wanting level playing field for science (Score:2)
Scientists and science research should be on a level playing field with other commercial endeavors. Not a way to block scientists, though a way for scientists to live under the same set of laws as non-science projects.
Science research should not be given an exemption of the law just because it is science and a noble pursuit.
Non-profits and tax-exempt organizations try the same 'don't apply negative laws or other regulatory costs to me' all the time.
Re: (Score:2)
There will not be. Some people are just dumb complainers.
Re: create more space junk... (Score:1)
Exactly what I thought, pay some other micro-satellite provider to launch the capsule and track it, you can even do this multiple times for the same budget and with different parameters, LEO satellites have about the same lifespan as the planning on this mission.
Re: (Score:3)
This is not being destroyed as a "controlled" detonation, but rather as deorbit. With the amount of dead satellites and space debris on orbit, it makes sense to start to properly understand deorbit of old satellites. At the same time, Starlink should also be in a position to provide plenty of data, if they wish to share this with the larger community.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Starlink very likely has zero data on the consequences of de-orbiting its satellites, because getting that data is difficult and expensive.
You have to instrument a satellite in a way that the sensors survive the re-entry process long enough to transmit data back to you, or survive the crash landing and are recoverable. Most of the work the ESA is doing is on developing those sensors so they can actually tell what conditions different parts of the satellite experience, and then reproduce them in a lab for te
What? (Score:2)
Wait -- they're going to launch a satellite and then let it break up on re-entry to get more data on how satellites break up on re-entry. But if a satellite is re-entering the atmosphere, and it breaks up, it won't create any "space junk" -- it'll break apart, and the parts will fall to earth, because they won't be in orbit any more.
Still doesn't explain [esa.int] what this has to do with orbital debris: "To keep Earth’s valuable orbits clean and prevent the creation of more space debris, it is important to re
Re: (Score:2)
If this experiment results in new techniques to ensure spacecraft are fully destroyed on reentry, it may reduce the requirements for active deorbit control. Instead of having to design with enough delta-v for a planned deorbit into the spaceship graveyard, I could instead design a frangible spacecraft with just enough delta-v to put it in a terminal trajectory.
Precision costs mass, and (for now) mass costs money.
It's not the first experiment-during-descent that's flown. IIRC, the "How does fire behave in
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
3 types of junk from satellites (Score:2)