![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Two defunct orbital masses seem to have not collided.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/10/leolabs-tracking-high-risk-collision-probability/ "Roughly one hour after the time of possible collision, LeoLabs confirmed “No indication of collision” via a statement on Twitter. [...] Both objects, an old Soviet-era satellite and the upper stage of a Chang Zheng 4C Chinese rocket, are inoperable and uncontrollable. Therefore, there was no way to move one of them out of the way to avoid the potential collision." There's a lot of stuff up there like this. I know various sorts of clean-up ideas have been floated. India has already demonstrated that satellite-killer weapons aren't the answer (2019). Two "relatively simple" ideas would be small satellites that dock with the corpse, and either provide retro-rockets for a de-orbit burn, or inflate/extend something to increase drag. These are likely viable only for the lowest targets and may be limited in applicable sizing. The other downside is that valuable materials are atomized during burn-up. Space tugs can be used to collect corpses into a cemetary orbit, but we don't have a lot of space tugs in use yet. A cemetary orbit would allow future "mining" of the materials, but is probably not fun to manage. Then there's devices like the X-37B. Bring the corpse back intact and near term. What are the [estimated] limits of the X-37B's orbital reach? Is launch vehicle capability or re-entry profile the more limiting factor? What do you with ears to ground think will be a first viable demonstration of debris control? /dps -- "This is all very fine, but let us not be carried away be excitement, but ask calmly, how does this person feel about in in his cooler moments next day, with six or seven thousand feet of snow and stuff on top of him?" _Roughing It_, Mark Twain. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Friday, October 30, 2020 at 4:24:42 AM UTC-4, JF Mezei wrote:
On 2020-10-29 15:52, Snidely wrote: Two defunct orbital masses seem to have not collided. If 2 satellites, devoid of any fuel, one in retrograde and the other in normal orbit, both on same plane and roughly same mass, ended up colliding face to face, what would happen? So we end up with a flat pankake that has 0 speed and drops straight down? Behave as two tennis balls that bounce off each other, with the retrograde now in normal orbit and the normal orbit SV now in retrograde? Nuclear fission explosion that creates a black hole and sucks all of the universe? When a car hits a cement wall at speed, it doesn't tend to explode into a billion bits flying out. Right? Just curious on what the actual behavious of a satellte would be. Is the energy level such that his is no longer a mechanical collision, and it behaves very differently? In the case of more likely collision (a 50° satellite hitting a nearly equatorial orbit for instance) would the satellite really spread debris all over the place or would they remain more or less whole (with big deformation where collision happened) and just see their trajectory/orbit changed? The Indian ASAT test ought to be a clear answer to your speculation. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct/30/2020 at 07:43, Dean Markley wrote :
On Friday, October 30, 2020 at 4:24:42 AM UTC-4, JF Mezei wrote: On 2020-10-29 15:52, Snidely wrote: Two defunct orbital masses seem to have not collided. If 2 satellites, devoid of any fuel, one in retrograde and the other in normal orbit, both on same plane and roughly same mass, ended up colliding face to face, what would happen? So we end up with a flat pankake that has 0 speed and drops straight down? Behave as two tennis balls that bounce off each other, with the retrograde now in normal orbit and the normal orbit SV now in retrograde? Nuclear fission explosion that creates a black hole and sucks all of the universe? When a car hits a cement wall at speed, it doesn't tend to explode into a billion bits flying out. Right? Just curious on what the actual behavious of a satellte would be. Is the energy level such that his is no longer a mechanical collision, and it behaves very differently? In the case of more likely collision (a 50° satellite hitting a nearly equatorial orbit for instance) would the satellite really spread debris all over the place or would they remain more or less whole (with big deformation where collision happened) and just see their trajectory/orbit changed? The Indian ASAT test ought to be a clear answer to your speculation. Yes, the Indian (but also the Chinese and US) ASAT test gives a good practical answer. But there are some interesting interactions going on that, even if their practical implications are small, are interesting. If two satellites, one prograde the other retrograde collide with a collision speed of twice orbital velocity, at the point of impact, you don't have metal bending like in a car accident. You have metal vaporising, the result is more like an explosion than like a car accident. That explains why the two don't just end up with zero velocity and fall down. But it gets a little more complicated and more interesting. As the ASAT test showed, some of the debris of the collision will end up in an orbit with higher apogee than either the satellites had, meaning that they end up with higher velocity. But the front of the satellite obviously collides before the back of the satellite and it will start being scattered in all direction while the back of the satellite hasn't really had time to realize that it is in a collision. The front of the satellite will scatter with some pieces having higher velocity than the original satellites. So the back of the of the satellite can hit some pieces of the front of the satellite with a collision speed even higher than twice orbital velocity. This can give an even more explosive collision, albeit with smaller pieces. This process can even be multi-staged. The front of the satellite hits the front of the other satellite, the middle of the satellite hits debris from the front of the satellite with higher velocities and the the back of the satellite hits the debris from the middle of the satellite with a yet again a higher impact speed. Of course at each stage the debris hitting farther behind parts of the satellite get smaller, but you can get some very small pieces (individual atoms) completely ejected from Earth's gravity well that way. But all the pieces will end up in an orbit that passes by the collision point (except tiny pieces which could be ejected from Earth's gravity well). Essentially all pieces will have a perigee that will be lower than the collision point. So, if the collision point is close to the atmosphere, all pieces should be de-orbited in relatively short order. But if the collision point is higher, you can have pieces with perigee near the height of the collision point and apogee much higher. That can be debris that will stay in orbit for a very long time. Alain Fournier |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The problem with Time | IAM | Misc | 0 | June 23rd 18 12:22 AM |
The problem with Time | Double-A[_4_] | Misc | 0 | June 22nd 18 09:40 PM |
The problem with Time | Mark Earnest[_2_] | Misc | 0 | June 22nd 18 01:10 PM |
The problem with Time | IAM | Misc | 0 | June 22nd 18 03:44 AM |
The Real Problem of Time in Physics | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 4 | July 2nd 16 05:37 PM |