Slashdot Mirror


The Space Garbage Scow, ala Cringely

An anonymous reader writes "Robert X. Cringely once again educates and amuses with his take on how we could clean up the garbage that's in orbit around Earth. I cannot vouch for his math, but it makes sense to me. Quoting: 'We’d start in a high orbit, above the space junk, because we could trade that altitude for speed as needed, simply by flying lower, trading potential energy for kinetic. Dragging the net behind a little unmanned spacecraft, my idea would be to go past each piece of junk in such a way that it not only lodges permanently in the net, but that doing so adds kinetic energy (hitting at shallow angles to essentially tack like a sailboat off the debris). But wait, there’s more! You not only have to try to get energy from each encounter, it helps if — like in a game of billiards or pool — each encounter results in an effective ricochet sending the net in the proper trajectory for its next encounter. Rinse and repeat 18,000 times.'"

8 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. Make sure. by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That this doesn't break up any debris into more parts - or cause the "net" to break and provide additional pieces of junk circling the earth.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    1. Re:Make sure. by shmlco · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, our boy Cringely wants the net to travel in a polar orbit to catch junk that's mainly traveling in a equatorial orbit. Think of a bit of junk t-boning your net at 17,000 MPH.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
  2. Cringeley Amuses by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought they were just in the early stages of establishing a ring-world, in terrestrial orbit. Oh well...

    There will of course, be no such mission, headed by NASA, or any other fraction of the Federal United States. That banana republic operates on such a scale, only when there is substantial room for contractor and supplier rip-off. If Cringeley can figure a way for DynaCor to pocket a billion on the side, instead of increasing fuel efficiency in spaceflight? It'd happen next year.

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
  3. "net"? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps Cringely doesn't have a clear idea what sort of debris we are dealing with here

    There are, certainly, some big chunks out there; but unpleasant enough(and far more numerous) are the little flecks of paint, bolts, and general fragments of this and that zipping around at bulletesque velocities.

    Either this "net" will be made of very close-woven unobtanium, of the sort that we don't yet have, despite decades of interest in the personnel armor industry, or it will have to be a vast spongy particle trap, of the sort whose volume would be completely prohibitive for any available launch mechanism.

    1. Re:"net"? by bmcage · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Not only that, but does he realize how LARGE that space is? Can you imagine saying to somebody, take your yacht, and sail around the oceans picking up 18000 pieces that go around with vastly different speeds (and orbits)? Now do this in 3D instead.

      Moreover, the delta v's involved are probably quite a lot larger than one would expect.

      And as you say, the big pieces are tracked and show up on radar, it is the little pieces that hit unexpectedly.

  4. Re:gravity by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Only the timescale. "Sooner or later" can be in the decades to centuries range, which is minimally useful for most of us now living.

  5. Re:Wouldn't that be bad when it re-enters? by ThreeGigs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd mod you up if I had points. Apparently Cringely hasn't thought about how valuable a few hundred metric tons of refined materials would be in orbit. Instead he says "Nope, we have to gather the stuff and bring it back to Earth." He fails to realize that _someone_ would certainly pay for access to all of that material. He also fails to realize that a polar orbit intersecting an equatorial orbit will result in a relative velocity of about 10 kilometers per second, which equates to 50 megajoules per kilogram. Carbon nanotubes or not, nothing is going to withstand such a large amount of energy in such a small area, repeatedly, along with whatever centripetal forces are acquired from off-center hits from debris.

    A visionary he might be, but a practical engineer he is definitely not.

  6. Re:Wouldn't that be bad when it re-enters? by khayman80 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At speeds above Mach 8.0, you can drive a pencil through a 100mm armor steel plate - even the pencil tip stays intact and sharp.

    Though I completely agree with your overall point, I'm curious if you have a citation for this sentence. The plate and pencil are in relative motion, yet apparently the impact drills a hole through the plate without even dulling the pencil? I tried googling for an experiment like this with no luck. Now I'm just trying to figure out what insane combination of high-speed photography and a hypersonic wind tunnel with a "pencil of death" feature would be required for proof...