NASA's Top 10 Space Junk Missions

Ant writes "NASA has identified the top ten space junk missions and said over 19,000 pieces of space junk are known to exist..." That's nothing: You should see my living room.

Comments

Re:Radioactive coolant

[Tisha_AH]

A great article on the space junk problem can be found at;

http://www.satellitetoday.com/commercial/manufacturers/Space-Debris-Small-But-Growing-Problem_21599.html

They discuss the radioactive coolant losses from discarded satellites that were boosted into "graveyard orbits" and how the cooling systems have sprung leaks, leaving behind solidified chunks of radioactive sodium, potassium and lead.

Re:Space sized bin bag

[Tisha_AH]

Much of the space debris is in very small pieces like paint chips, pieces of thermal blankets, screws/nuts/bolts, etc..

The volume of near space that is "polluted" is vast. It is a constantly evolving three dimensional environment with debris moving at all sorts of crazy trajectories that change frequently depending upon the solar wind, geomagnetic field and the swelling and contraction of our tenuous upper atmosphere.

It would be like searching the beach in Fiji, looking for a particular 1957 nickel. The efforts to chase down each individual piece of trash is much greater than the risks of that particular piece.

We need to;
1. Stop spewing little parts, disgards and trash into space.
2. Do a better job of tracking what is up there.
3. Harden satellites to be able to survive the impact from a very small object.
4. Come up with a clean way to dispose of old space hardware other than abandonment in "graveyard orbits".
 

Re:Cosmos 2421

[SJ2000]

http://russianforces.org/blog/2006/07/problems_with_cosmos2421.shtml
http://russianforces.org/blog/2008/03/cosmos2421_completed_its_missi.shtml

Re:Time to develop..

[Flea of Pain]

Most of this stuff is metallic right? Possibly even magnetic? Methinks we need a Wile E. Coyote style ACME space-junk removing magnet! As an added benefit, it may trap fast moving birds in its steady stream of space debris!

Questions questions questions

[teebob21]

For the sake of discussion, let's assume this report showed a problem orders of magnitude worse, and we were on the verge of Kessler syndrome conditions. What technologies exist today to combat the problem? (Yes, I know, no government today would unilaterally scrub space without a quid pro quo...)

If there are 19,000 trackable chunks of debris, how many untrackable (and just as deadly) small particles are there? I know that particle densities are minute. If we launched an array of satellites with Aerogel paneling, is it reasonable to expect a significant improvement in "air" quality up there?

What about that heat-ray device recently pulled our of Afghanistan? Can we launch one of those to spray microwaves tangentially to the Earth's surface? Would the heat applied to a paint-chip sized debris particle be enough to change the orbit? It doesn't take too much delta-v to alter the eccentricity of a paint fleck enough to burn up in orbit, does it?

(Less coffee, more sleep next time, methinks)

Re:Questions questions questions

[MozeeToby]

A ground based laser broom with adaptive optics is probably the only remotely cost effective way of mitigating the problem. From the ground you can't easily reduce an objects velocity but you can push it into a more elliptical orbit, if you can get it elliptical enough you put the perigee inside Earth's atmosphere and let that do the rest. It's the only way I've heard about that doesn't involve a ludicrous number of launches but at the same time will work only for relatively small pieces of debris in low orbit. Luckily, that's where the majority of the problem lies so it might be effective enough until we can deal with the rest.

Re:Time to develop..

[mcgrew]

Yeah, well while you're developing presently impossible Star Trek gadgets like a tractor beam, why not just develop a matter transporter and beam the shit down, Scotty?

Short answers, more like guidelines

[starglider29a]

In no order:

• It takes the same delta-v to de-orbit any two masses in the same orbit. Paint chip or Star Destroyer. Thrust requirements follow Newton, not Roddenberry.
• Whatever energy you have to apply to an object must be applied to the object. It's 100km away at 7km per second. Good luck.
• The delta-v to get close enough to where you can apply delta-v (bump a paint chip) adds up. If you could hit it with a beam from 100km away, that would be great, but delivering delta-v at 100km is problematic.
• Almost nothing is magnetic, so forget that. We don't have a tractor beam, and Yarkovsky Effect is insignificant on these tiny pieces. A maser/laser doesn't deliver momentum very well. Heat does nothing.
• Blobs of Aerogel in a counter-directional/retrograde orbit could sweep up the small stuff, but the volume that needs to be swept is like mopping a basketball court with a cotton swab.

Solve the "how do you apply force at a distance" issue and yer halfway there.