Slashdot Mirror


Space Junk 'Cleaning' Missions Urgently Needed

Following a conference on space debris, the European Space Agency has warned that the amount of space junk floating around in orbit is a problem that needs to be dealt with 'urgently.' They are calling for a number of test missions to examine different methods of controlling or removing the debris. "Our understanding of the growing space debris problem can be compared with our understanding of the need to address Earth’s changing climate some 20 years ago," said Heiner Klinkrad, head of the agency's Space Debris office. A couple years ago we discussed an idea for de-orbiting space junk by hitting it with a laser to change its momentum. An Australian company has now received funding from NASA and the Australian government to try just that. "We've been developing tracking systems using lasers for some years, so we can actually track very small objects with a laser rangefinder to very high accuracy. ... If you allow that velocity to change over a period of perhaps 24 hours, then you can get actually a 100-meter shift in the location of an object to deflect it from colliding with another space debris object." Other plans are in development as well, and there currently exists an international guideline saying that new hardware must de-orbit and burn up in the atmosphere after 25 years of operation — but compliance is lagging. Meanwhile, collision events are becoming more common (PDF), and experts worry about the safety of the International Space Station and important satellites. "Their direct costs and the costs of losing them will by far exceed the cost of remedial activities."

165 comments

  1. Europe again by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why is it always up to Europe to clean up the rest of the world's mess?

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Europe again by russotto · · Score: 1, Troll

      It's not. RTFS: The Europeans do the whining, the Americans and the Australians do the work.

    2. Re:Europe again by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why is it always up to Europe to clean up the rest of the world's mess?

      Because we're smarter and more capable than the rest of the world, that's why! So the duty naturally falls to us. We're also very humble about it and leave all the self-congratulation to Americans. What would they do without us?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re:Europe again by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      "Our understanding of the growing space debris problem can be compared with our understanding of the need to address Earthâ(TM)s changing climate some 20 years ago,"

      We're still denying there's a problem. There must be something wrong with your data.

    4. Re:Europe again by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

      Penance for giving the world a monarchy rule system.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    5. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really ?

      Both of you tell, us more!

      But your comment lacking any kind of thesis supporting argumentation like that of your predecessor.

      Short: You are both continentalisticists ( nationalism does not apply to continents ;) ) that only think that the own mates are supperior to the other.

      Btw. even living on different continents one should face the worst fact of all, we are living on the same earth.

    6. Re:Europe again by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 2

      "Our understanding of the growing space debris problem can be compared with our understanding of the need to address Earthâ(TM)s changing climate some 20 years ago,"

      We're still denying there's a problem. There must be something wrong with your data.

      There is only a problem if you're in the business of putting satellites into orbit. I'm not. Most people aren't.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    7. Re:Europe again by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 2

      True dat. Spoken like a true capitalist. And of course, I don't use weather or communication or TV satellites, either, so I don't need to worry about it.

    8. Re:Europe again by Runaway1956 · · Score: 0

      Europeans created most of the messes here on earth, so you can start making amends by cleaning up outer space.

      And, yes, I want all my space debris cleaned. No one wants to look at old, cruddy, nasty trash floating around in space. Wax and buff, and make it PRETTY!!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    9. Re:Europe again by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      That "White Man's Burden" probably gets heavy after awhile, doesn't it?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    10. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering the carbon that he exhales with every breath spreads around the globe, travelling from his mouth into your pants, the good news is he already (by proxy) licked your balls and rimmed your crack for good measure. The bad news is - it works both ways...

      That's the sign we live on one planet - we share the same air and eat our shared ancestors in one, global, natural recycling centre - the environment.

    11. Re:Europe again by Dereck1701 · · Score: 2

      If I'm remembering my history correctly Europe has created its own share of messes that effected the rest of the world, WWI and WWII anyone?

    12. Re:Europe again by quax · · Score: 2

      Watched TV lately? Used a GPS? How about looked up a weather report?

      If you haven't done any of this lately, then maybe you really don't need satellites.

    13. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, you're not using any of the stuff produced from space technology. I see that you have a nice cave there, best get back inside it.

    14. Re:Europe again by NemosomeN · · Score: 1

      Hey, we already got Tang, everything else is just lagniappe.

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
    15. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really, the GP probably makes his black man servant carry it for him.

    16. Re:Europe again by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's a problem if you enjoy satellite delivered services like TV, telephony, semi-accurate weather forecasting etc.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    17. Re:Europe again by bkmoore · · Score: 1

      Why is it always up to Europe to clean up the rest of the world's mess?

      Because ....

      1. China says, "you Europeans had two centuries to make messes before you had to clean them up. We're still a developing country, maybe in two hundred years we'll start thinking about it. Can you give us licenses to all your cleaning up technology, so we can sell it to you?"
      2. U.S.A. says, "there is no mess to clean up. God made the world in seven days and he'll clean it up in six. Messes, pi, fluoride, the Metric System, Obama, etc. are all European-African socialist conspiracies."
      3. Kim Jung Un says, "I've got a BOMB and will make a big MESS, that is unless, the world pays me ONE MILLION DOLLARS!!!"
      4. Russia says, "America makes all the messes, let America clean them up."
      5. Israel says, "America please make more messes, especially in Iran."
      6. Iran claims, "we've hacked your mess and made it land in our country...btw. I've got a BOMB and will make a big MESS..."

      I could go on, but want to get back to watching my Duke of Hazzard rerun.

    18. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing wrong with capatilism, just heartles people, huge fucking difference comrade.

    19. Re:Europe again by Brucelet · · Score: 1

      Weather and research satellites are going to be having trouble from budget shortfalls even without considering orbital debris problems.

    20. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the Big Bang and the subsequent formation of the Solar System effected the world.

    21. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are we talking about needs as in "I need chocolate" or as in "we need to survive"?

    22. Re:Europe again by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      Watched TV lately?

      No, not really. Cut the cord some time ago. Mainly rely on streaming. Broadband is great in that regard.

      Used a GPS?

      No, not recently.
      Cell tower triangulation and wifi assisted locating is usually enough.

      How about looked up a weather report?

      Not a weather report, but forecast sure. It was cool a few days ago, yesterday it was warmer so there's a decent chance that it was going to be warmer today since yesterday weather from the west was clear and warmer too. Today it was warmer indeed and pretty sunny, however the rain that ground radar is picking up over Illinois right now probably will make it's way over Northern Indiana sometime tonight, as that's where most weather this time of year comes from for us.

    23. Re:Europe again by Nyder · · Score: 2

      Why is it always up to Europe to clean up the rest of the world's mess?

      Both world wars where a European mess. Not sure about WWI (public school education, they didn't teach us much), but WWII, we (the USA) cleaned up Europe's mess and it turned us into dickwads/bullies towards the world.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    24. Re:Europe again by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Why is it always up to Europe to clean up the rest of the world's mess?

      Because we're smarter and more capable than the rest of the world, that's why! So the duty naturally falls to us. We're also very humble about it and leave all the self-congratulation to Americans. What would they do without us?

      Well, we did save you from being German, maybe next time we'll sit that one out?

      --
      Be seeing you...
    25. Re:Europe again by khallow · · Score: 1

      Why is it always up to Europe to clean up the rest of the world's mess?

      When did Europe start doing this? It's welcome to do so, but I am a bit surprised.

    26. Re:Europe again by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      You're damn accurate and funny, except that Iran has always declared it did not want a BOMB, and puts all its fissile material under international safeguard.

    27. Re:Europe again by f3rret · · Score: 1

      Well, we did save you from being German, maybe next time we'll sit that one out?

      Nah, Soviets did that.

      --
      Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
    28. Re:Europe again by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry but capitalism, like every other ism before it, is simply doomed, why? Simple because greed always wins against a belief in the capitalist system so they corrupt the system until it no longer functions and falls apart. The right wingers like to trot out that bit about the people voting themselves more favors but that isn't what breaks the system, what breaks the system is those at the top that become too powerful to lose, like how Goldman Sachs got 125% on the dollar when the housing bubble hit courtesy of the American taxpayer.

      What happens is you end up with a handful at the top that are greed on wheels and rig more and more of the system to give themselves more and more of the pie until the people will happily choose any other system because "it can't be as bad as what we got". For a capitalist system to function capital actually has to flow through the system and when it becomes too tilted towards those handful at the top that no longer happens. The "dirty little secret" when it comes to the gold standard is that if the USA were to go back to it there wouldn't be a cent flowing through the economy as its all being hoarded by a handful at the very top.

      As for TFA? Two words...tar baby. Anyone that has read anything about this knows that the danger ain't from the objects big enough for you to change course to dodge it, its the fact that a single screw traveling at those speeds can tear into a spacecraft like a bullet so what you need is something capable of getting all the little bits and bringing them down, hence the tar baby. It wouldn't even have to be sticky, just thick enough that it could absorb all those little bits without letting them go through,I'm sure with a little experimenting we can find the right mix then you simply let it go with maybe one or two little thrusters to use to bring it down once it gets enough bits stuck in it that its no longer useful.

      So while something like a laser might work on the bigger stuff i don't see it working on all the paint chips and screws and little bits that turn a sat into Swiss cheese over time, for that we need to think outside the box...tar baby.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    29. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt you were even born at the time. Big sacrifice on your part, don't you think?

    30. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Both world wars where a European mess.

      I wasn't aware that Japan was in Europe. Oh well, guess I better study my map a little harder.

    31. Re:Europe again by Anonyme+Connard · · Score: 1

      And US saved half of Europe from being Soviet.

    32. Re:Europe again by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Good, have at it then, space garbagemen. In the meantime, give the US some credit for stuff like Hubble.

    33. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looking at the economic situation, maybe it wouldn't be that bad after all.

    34. Re:Europe again by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Well, we did save you from being German, maybe next time we'll sit that one out?

      Hardly. European geo-politics hasn't worked like that since the 19th century. You didn't save me from "being Russian", and for all that I am not a Russian.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    35. Re:Europe again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Remember when France fixed America's screwup in Vietnam?

      Oh, wait.

      Remember when Europe fixed the problems in the Balkans?

      Oh, wait.

      Remember when Europe fixed all the problems created by colonialism in Africa and South America?

      Oh, wait.

    36. Re:Europe again by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      And US saved half of Europe from being Soviet.

      The Soviets saved half of Europe from being Americanised. ÐÐÐÑÐбо Ð'оÐÑÐ!

      Bloody Slashcode's script incompetence!

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    37. Re:Europe again by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Tang didn't come from any space program.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tang_(drink)

    38. Re:Europe again by dave420 · · Score: 1

      How do you think they get the co-ordinates for the cell tower? Even if you don't personally use satellites, you undoubtedly rely on services that do, even if you are unaware of it.

    39. Re:Europe again by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      ESA! ESA! ESA!

    40. Re:Europe again by NemosomeN · · Score: 1

      Was it really necessary to fact-check that joke?

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
    41. Re:Europe again by kermidge · · Score: 1

      No.

      I did it because I still run across many who accept as gospel a number of misconceptions or mistruths about stuff like Tang.

      I'm slow, and missed the joke until much later. Sorry.

    42. Re:Europe again by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      you're being sarcastic here, right ? europe is hardly potty trained, they're good at looking good and pointing fingers, excellent at scaring capital away. Failing human rights in the name of diplomacy (and looking good). Telling others what to do (or did i say that yet) without any kind of military threat to back that up.
      and meanwhile harldy capable of keeping some kind of illusion of cohesion. What's going on in germany right now, if that spreads across other countries, this euro-fad might yet crash upon itself.
      i'm sure space debris is a huge problem. But frankly, a collective of governments forcing a country to tax everyone who has €100k to fix their bankers (afaik small business owners can have that very well, not just huge mafia lords) and then afterwards has to put out a little note in small print saying 'well, we need another €11 billion or we can't really give any kind of aid we promised to anyone while paying its own personnel excessive wages is
      i lost track
      so , it needs some polishing this europe you speak about
      don't get me wrong, it's the only way forward but most great leaders here of the ancient world still think like the ancient world, and they talk a lot about what should be but substantial solutions are often hard to find
      so ... they might yet destroy everything they never built so far dragging everyone further down but
      without a unified europe no competition at all is possible
      unless the solid ones (who for some reason managed to stay out of the actual union) make their own union ... the UK, norway, switzerland, hell even little luxembourg (i think the duchy is full member though) seem to be able to manage very well even if the UK has had a little dent in its economy again They dont even have actual space missions so instead of trying to look good in syria and pointing away at the moon maybe they should leave that to people who have the skill for it and concentrate on consolidation first

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
    43. Re:Europe again by NemosomeN · · Score: 1

      Not a problem, should have made it more clear that my "fact-check" comment was meant to be taken as gentle ribbing. Now that I re-read it, it looks angrier than I intended.

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
    44. Re:Europe again by kermidge · · Score: 1

      No prob. I could have said "Yes, yes it was." [grin]

      cheers, mate.

  2. Planetes by bidule · · Score: 4, Interesting
    --
    ID: the nose did not occur naturally, how would we wear glasses otherwise? (apologies to Voltaire)
    1. Re:Planetes by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      LOVE that anime. One of the best animes i have ever seen. And the fully enclosed smoking seat gave me hope for the future.

    2. Re:Planetes by garyok · · Score: 1

      Seconded. I loved how well-realised it all was. Favourite thing was the progress bar for interplanetary video chat to let you know when you could expect a response.

      --
      One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors - Plato
    3. Re:Planetes by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      It was well put together but the show was spoiled for me by the persistently gloomy message with each episode, it was a complete downer, unneccessarily so.

    4. Re:Planetes by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      What about the moon ninjas. They eventually save the day.

    5. Re:Planetes by Kilo+Kilo · · Score: 1

      But it ended on a high note. I think that was the point; despite all the bad that had happened to the characters, they were able to overcome it in the end.

  3. Space Quest by puddingebola · · Score: 1

    Where's Roger Wilco, space janitor, when you need him?

    1. Re:Space Quest by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

      Gallagher: I prefer one moon, you know? That way you know what to call it: The Moon.
      Lt. Ted Santen: [Over the radio] More color commentary from the space janitor.
      Gallagher: The correct term is mechanical systems engineer.
      Chip Pettengill: ....But he will accept space janitor.

      From Red Planet.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
  4. Janitorial Service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally! Some janitors that might have pay competitive with those in the NYC Public School System! Wonder if they will sub-contract their work to others as well?

  5. My Idea! by g0bshiTe · · Score: 1

    How about we just attach a giant magnet to the back of space craft similar to what you'd see behind the rear or front tires of an RV to pick up road debris before it punctures the tires.

    Citation: http://www.google.com/patents/US3956111

    --
    I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    1. Re:My Idea! by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      How about we just attach a giant magnet to the back of space craft similar to what you'd see behind the rear or front tires of an RV to pick up road debris before it punctures the tires.

      That's a bit like trying to keep bullets from hitting you by fanning them away with a folded bit of paper. Actually, no... It's exactly like that.

    2. Re:My Idea! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      I thought you were being just a little stupid. For almost two seconds I really thought that. Then - I realized that no matter how carefully you maneuver, no matter how closely you match orbits with the debris you plan on collecting - a frigging magnet isn't going to have any effect on most of the debris. Unless someone has been shooting iron cannonballs up into space.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    3. Re:My Idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure you are being funny. So no whoosh! please. But for those that don't realize that he is being funny - a magnet only attracts ferrous metals (think iron). There isn't much of that sent to space by mankind. Mostly we send things like titanium, aluminum, etc.

    4. Re:My Idea! by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Ever tried to pick up a piece of aluminium with a magnet?

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    5. Re:My Idea! by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      How about we just attach a giant magnet to the back of space craft similar to what you'd see behind the rear or front tires of an RV to pick up road debris before it punctures the tires.

      Ignoring that lots of the things that puncture tires will not react to magnets to begin with, how does the magnet being mounted behind the tires stop things from reaching them?

    6. Re:My Idea! by Nyder · · Score: 1

      How about we just attach a giant magnet to the back of space craft similar to what you'd see behind the rear or front tires of an RV to pick up road debris before it punctures the tires.

      Citation: http://www.google.com/patents/US3956111

      Going to point out if you put magnets behind the wheels, you aren't going to stop it from being punctured.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    7. Re:My Idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      reverse?

    8. Re:My Idea! by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Ever tried to pick up a piece of aluminium with a magnet?

      I hear it has to be a very very big magnet..

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    9. Re:My Idea! by zmollusc · · Score: 1

      Yes. The trick is to use an electromagnet and rapidly cycle the current.

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    10. Re:My Idea! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Hmmm, a patent with no product on sale.

      Considering that novelty golf ball detectors can be sold successfully as bomb detectors, this doesn't say a lot for the actual effectiveness of this idea.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    11. Re:My Idea! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      It's for when you're reversing for 50 miles because you haven't realised that the vehicle has a manual transmission and can't read the instruction manual while driving.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  6. Too Little Too Late? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    Perhaps this is something that should have been taken seriously 30 years ago? It will take at least that long to hone the technology and pry the funding from the tightwads that only approve of pork in their districts.

    And, maybe NASA should jump at this - they seem to be in search of a mission and the dollars that go with it, maybe this is it?

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Too Little Too Late? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Reading comprehension: don't post without it.

      What am I saying; this is Slashdot. Carry on.

    2. Re:Too Little Too Late? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 0

      Anonymous Coward == Asshole

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:Too Little Too Late? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frosty Piss == Even less palatable than their namesake

    4. Re:Too Little Too Late? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a true Anonymous Coward.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    5. Re:Too Little Too Late? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd rather be Anonymous Coward than Frosty Piss.

  7. Salvage 1 by x3rc3s · · Score: 2

    Sounds like a job for Andy Griffith http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvage_1

    1. Re:Salvage 1 by Ferretman · · Score: 1

      That was a great show back in the day.

      --
      Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
  8. Yes, mom. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll start on it as soon as I finish this.

  9. It's a conspiracy! by bussdriver · · Score: 0, Troll

    Those scientists just want more grants and jobs to make more money at the tax payers' expense!

    This is just like global warming; a big hoax conspiracy that will spread to every greedy scientist around the world to pull the wool over everybody's eyes. But unfortunately, we only have a small industry which can't afford to fund think tanks to counter the lies of these wealthy science organizations. We may lose to this fraud and be forced into paying a "space tax" to fund the cleaning of this fake problem - putting us out of business and killing off the private space industry.

    It has happened before... ;-)

    1. Re:It's a conspiracy! by bussdriver · · Score: 1

      I guess this sounded too realistic and not sarcastic enough for moderators.

  10. It Will Take a Headline to Get Anything Done by mlookaba · · Score: 1

    "Their direct costs and the costs of losing them will by far exceed the cost of remedial activities."

    Unfortunately, logic like that doesn't work on elected officials. It will probably take a tragedy and loss of life before people pay attention to the science behind this.

    1. Re:It Will Take a Headline to Get Anything Done by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1


      "Their direct costs and the costs of losing them will by far exceed the cost of remedial activities."

      Unfortunately, logic like that doesn't work on elected officials. It will probably take a tragedy and loss of life before people pay attention to the science behind this.

      Is that a bet? GPS is pretty much baked into every piece of American military hardware large enough to house it, either as a near-necessity or a substantial convenience, and teams GLONASS and GALILEO(along with whatever the Indians and Chinese are calling their proposed regional systems these days) aren't exactly hobby projects, and has also crept into lots of expensive, long-term plans for air traffic control, decomissioning of certain older transponder location systems, etc. You've also got the definitely-not-officially-up-there; but highly valued, spy stuff that the NRO and NGA would be very sad about.

      Sure, if a few esoteric scientific payloads were toasted, we'd probably fail to muster a yawn(breathing that deeply takes effort), and something like the ISS would muster a bit more publicity, but no real plans to do anything about it, since it's something of a white elephant. Even things like satellite phone, internet, and TV services might be ultimately considered disposable(the economics of just laying the cable and putting up the towers for terrestrial wireless aren't good enough now; but if the satellite attrition rate increased enough...), though they might hang on because of their utility in high-value sectors like petroleum and mineral extraction and military communications.

      Satellite capabilities are baked sufficiently closely into more-or-less-sacred military budgets that it would be an extreme surprise to see lack of attention given to protecting at least individual satellites. It isn't clear that anybody would actually stump up for 'keep space open for the betterment of all mankind, etc.'; but much of the hardware in space has substantially more influential friends.

    2. Re:It Will Take a Headline to Get Anything Done by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      I wonder - what does Global Positioning become when you are no longer on the globe? Does it become Orbiting Positioning? Space positioning? Stellar positioning? Galactic positioning? Milky Way positioning - ooops, I'm hungry, be back later!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    3. Re:It Will Take a Headline to Get Anything Done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The pattern is that you government doesn't deal with the problem and ban some related inanimate object that was at the scene. They won't do anything about space junk. They'll just declare spacecraft unsafe and ban their use.

      "They’ll come at you sideways. It’s how they think. It’s how they move."

    4. Re:It Will Take a Headline to Get Anything Done by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      I wonder - what does Global Positioning become when you are no longer on the globe? Does it become Orbiting Positioning? Space positioning?

      That does raise the moderately interesting question of how far from the Earth the GPS system would remain useful.

      Doing a little geometry, the distance from receiver to satellite varies between about 25Mm (at local horizon) and 20Mm (zenithal range). So receivers need to be able to handle that 20% variation in time-of-flight.

      [dum-te-dum] Pythagoras [tweedle-dee] Solve quadratic.

      I make it that those relative time-of flight differences would make the same basic (relative) capabilities of the receivers be able to work outside the orbital altitude of the transmitters to a height of +230Mm (which would be about half-way to the Moon's orbit) and and down to a height of about -25Mm from orbital altitude (which is pretty close to the centre of the Earth).

      So, if the receivers are sensitive enough, then a timing and calculation system that is just good enough to work on Earth, should work out to about half-way to the Moon. Which may have been a subsidiary design concept, because a relatively small fleet (6, or 8? satellites) stationed spaced around the Moon's orbit would then probably give fairly good absolute positioning (to within a few km? ; radio/ visual range?) for the whole of "sub-Lunar space". That could be coincidence, but I doubt it.

      Of course, signal strength and receiver fidelity would probably be the real determinants. I.e. you get what you pay for.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  11. We need indeed more space junk! by burni2 · · Score: 0

    So that no asshole can propose going to space to evade mankinds extinction as a good alternative .. till at least 1000yrs. have passed.

    Within the meantime we should clean up our own mess(those that we built our life and and /.), the only space operations allowed shall be those to get a better understanding of the atmosphere & oceans (OFF EARTH not ALPHA PROXIMA).

    Perhaps the workforce we say money can buy is better used on building a CO2 neutral, diseasefree world without the possiblity of nuclear plants running havok ..

    Do you know what's similar between Japan and California ?
    - devastating earthquakes
    - nuclear power near the coast
    - and tsunami

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/USA_Nuclear_power_plants_map.gif

    1. Re:We need indeed more space junk! by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

      And then an asteroid comes and wipes us all out, or a megavolcano, or some other random event, and we are all stuck on this rock to die. Great idea guy.

    2. Re:We need indeed more space junk! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Speaking of assholes - how have you been?

      Mankind will never do what you dream of. No matter how far into space, no matter how far into the future mankind goes, he will always be a messy son of a bitch. Wars and fratricide. Drugs and prostitution. Theft and tax evasion. You name it - everything we've ever done wrong, we'll continue to do, to the end of time, and to the extreme edges of the universe. If we ever find alternate realities, or the dimensional doorways - we'll take all our baggage there too.

      Apparently, you don't like mankind, as you want to ensure his extinction when that one big rock DOES hit the earth.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    3. Re:We need indeed more space junk! by Brucelet · · Score: 1

      "Let's make a big mess, to motivate ourselves to fix that other big mess."

    4. Re:We need indeed more space junk! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      What is inherently wrong with drugs and prostitution? We've almost certainly been indulging in those entertainments since our ancestors were chimp's ancestors.

      Theft and tax avoidance are the new kids on the block. And neither generally directly kills anyone.

      Wars and fratricide ... are probably the oldest behaviours of the bunch - and they've not made us (or any of our ancestor species) extinct. Ever.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  12. Kessler syndrome is the real worry by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Informative

    The worst case scenario is a Kessler syndrome event http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome. In this situation, a bad collision in low Earth orbit creates enough debris to trigger a series of collisions, each creating an expanding debris cloud. This could take most LEO satellites in a matter of days, and would render much of LEO effectively unusable for years. Part of the problem is that while there are a lot of possible orbits, the set of orbits which are both cheap to get to and practically useable is a much smaller set. And those orbits are almost precisely the orbits with a lot of debris. Right now, satellite are required to be able to move to either graveyard orbits or to be safely disposed in the atmosphere, but there are a lo of older satellites that were launched before any such requirement. And even with such plans, launches inevitably produce a few debris items with each launch, and satellites occasionally shed things. The early Delta rockets were very bad at producing a lot of debris, which contributed much of the current problem. Thee 2007 Chinese satellite test http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_missile_test very much didn't help matters, and produced a massive still expanding cloud of debris. On the bright side, non-LEO orbits like geostat are still clean.

    1. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by thesupraman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Nice SciFi, but only a little statistics will soon tell you that...
      Space is big, really really big (even the prefered orbits).

      To sustain the required chain reaction you need a WHOLE lot more junk, and you also need it to be in particular orbits (too much of it is in somewhat similar orbits..)

      Its 'bad' right now because of the high cost of a VERY rare event (a significant energy impact), not because impacts are common.

      Impacts also tend not NOT produce a cloud of high energy objects, most objects are metalic and tend to be punched through rather than shatter (yes, even at the cool side of orbital temperatures).

      Of course plenty of people (governments, etc) realise that there is a fair bit of valuable 'junk' up there, and its value will rise in the future, however we will not see any mandate for collecting it and keeping in orbit for reuse, simply because a LOT of it is far too classified - even the commercial stuff - if China for example started collecting up old US sattelites, I suspect there would be trouble, etc.

      The thing to remember is this 'global warming type emergency' is bring proposed by the head of a body who would get funding to work on it - sound at all surprising?

    2. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by interkin3tic · · Score: 0

      if China for example started collecting up old US sattelites, I suspect there would be trouble, etc.

      You think that would stop them? I suspect China would tell the US to go fuck off. Or would say "Think of it as repo for the money you owe us."

    3. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by Brucelet · · Score: 2

      Do you have any idea how hard it is to "collect" a satellite? Sure' we've gotten quite good at rendezvousing with a specific object in a single orbit, but once you're there, it's incredibly difficult to dismantle and reuse materials. We have plenty of expertise in manipulating things that were designed to be repaired, and even in improvising repairs that weren't expected, but to build something new from old parts and materials would be something else entirely. Plus, even if you had some incredible repair/recycle mission worked out, all you've done is removed one single piece of space junk. Moving on to another would likely require a large change in your orbit, at which point your fuel margin vanishes quickly. Thus, you'd need nearly as many launches as there are satellites already up there to get everything. Good luck finding the funds and manpower.

    4. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by aliquis · · Score: 2

      Didn't the US blow one just after that?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA-193#Destruction ?

      But sure, just complain on/mention the Chinese (stupid as it was regardless.)

    5. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      USA-193 was in much lower orbit with the orbit already decaying so most of the debris burned up. In contrast, the Chinese test was in a stable orbit at the upper end of LEO and so produced a lot more long-term debris. That's not to say that USA-193 was at all a remotely good thing, but it was not nearly as bad.

    6. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by pyalot · · Score: 1

      Kessler took into account that collisions are unlikely and that they won't produce the same kind of debris. And both don't matter to the outcome for some statistically unintuitive reasons. When two objects collide, there will be an increase in debris. It might only be a few crumbs, or it might be a spectacular cloud of new debris, it doesn't matter. What matters is that the outcome of the collision increased the likelyhood of further collsisions in the whole system. This is known as a runaway feedback loop, and traditional statistics don't tell you much about how these go. The reason is that they're unstable, chaotic systems, much like the weather. Statistics can't tell you next weeks weather because it can't model chaotic systems. Chaotic systems that include feedback have a particularly nasty habit of "tipping over". That is, they look normal and noncritical right up to the point where they become wild runaway feedback loops. Two objects colliding have a separating velocity, and for certain, their separating velocity (and energy) after collision is reduced. However that does not mean that the energy is reduced for the whole system much. For a third object (subject to a later collision) is not affected by the change of energy in the previous system. The amount of energy removed from the entire system is proportional to the fraction of energy that one collision of two objects represents. I.e. every collision only removes a very tiny fraction of energy from the system.

    7. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by Hentes · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, China is now America's biggest ally, so they can do whatever they want.

    8. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by thesupraman · · Score: 1

      yawn, you seem to like a lot of hand waving about 'Statistics dont do that' without much understanding.

      There is nothing special here, statistics work just as well here as they do in fusion and fission reactions, in effect very similar things (although there you are trying to create a runway system..). Neutron energy, absorbtion cross-sections, etc, etc.

      You still need a bunch of requirements for a 'runaway reaction', and there is not NEARLY enough space junk to cause one, just as all the uranium in the earths crush does not just happen to spontaineously fission..

      You should stop treating math as a magical field open to interpretation, and learn that it has real applications.

      Yes, you can get a runaway reaction in space junk, no there is not even close to enough up there yet (or likely in the even medium future) for a runaway reaction, and by not even close I mean ORDERS of magnitude too little.

    9. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the information :)

      I don't even know if that one was the one (and only one?) the US blew up but it was the hit I found. If I remember correctly it happened just after China had done it or something such?

      Good that it didn't messed up all too much :)

    10. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by vandamme · · Score: 1

      You think the Chinese are bad, wait until Best Korea starts orbiting shit and smashing it all over.

    11. Re:Kessler syndrome is the real worry by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Statistics can't tell you next weeks weather because it can't model chaotic systems.

      [SELF : looks at the 10 day forecast on the vessel's internal network. Sees another weather bump coming in which will mean we have to get Wednesday's boat alongside and unloaded and going into the ground no later than Thursday afternoon, or the completion operation gets at least a week's delay. That's 600,000 to 700,000 USD extra cost on the operation.]

      Sorry, what were you saying about not being able to get a weather forecast into next week? We pay around USD 1000/ day for these forecasts, because they are accurate enough to make decisions on the basis of. I suspect that you're not talking to the right weather forecasters.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  13. Hmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do we ship some chineese up there to do our recycling?

    1. Re:Hmmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm. They'll release so much smog that air drag will increase and pull everything down. Then we can start over. A bit roundabout but I guess it works.

  14. Cow magnets by teaserX · · Score: 1

    Like this....only REALLY BIG!

    --
    We really need your help
    http://www.gofundme.com/help-sherry
    1. Re:Cow magnets by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      I'm almost tempted to find out how strong those are. They look like interesting - and relatively cheap - toys. If they're strong enough.

      Then again ... dead hard drive ...

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  15. Well , GOOD idea actually Space junk is expensive by spineboy · · Score: 1

    It should be a high priority to collect the debris, as it is quite valuable - it takes a lot on money to get stuff into orbit, and most of the stuff is probably space worthy material.

    We shouldn't think of it as junk, but as free bulding material left around.

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
  16. Tragedy of the commons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If we can't manage our common sky, even with so much of the investment controlled by the elite. How can we ever hope to manage the bigger mess down here?

    1. Re:Tragedy of the commons by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Bigger mess down here? Just export it. Start colonies on Mars, the Moon, and some of those wonderfully earth-like moons orbiting the gas giants. Use them for penal colonies, so that if a colony is destroyed, we don't lose a whole lot. Just export the messes, like England did so long ago!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    2. Re:Tragedy of the commons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no, no. You have it all wrong. Earth first! We'll strip mine the other planets later.

    3. Re:Tragedy of the commons by Brucelet · · Score: 1

      There's plenty of interesting moons in the Solar System, but not a single one I'd call "wonderfully earth-like".

    4. Re:Tragedy of the commons by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Start with gravity. Earth-like gravity means that the moon can be worked with. Micro-gravities are supposed to be unhealthy, and of course multi-gravities will crush us. If a body in space has earth-like gravity, then we can figure out how to use it!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    5. Re:Tragedy of the commons by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      That gives us a range of bodies that we can deal with : Body Surface gravity (m/s/s), composition. Oh! I've not used the DL/DT/DD construction before on /. ; I'll have to remember this! Jupiter 2.5, gas with heavy radiation Neptune 1.14, gas Saturn 1.06, gas Earth 1.0, clement Venus 0.905, dense atmosphere & hot Uranus 0.9, gas Mars 0.38, no effective atmosphere & cold Mercury 0.38, no atmosphere & hot Io 0.183, sulphurous thin atmosphere and intensely volcanic Moon 0.166, no atmosphere Ganymede 0.15, no atmosphere Titan 0.14, thick cold atmosphere Europa 0.13, icy, strong radiation and no atmosphere Callisto 0.126, icy, strong radiation and no atmosphere

      So, which one would you work with, particularly considering that we've no viable techniques for getting any further out than Mars (and that is pretty dubious).

      I've said it before and I'll say it again : to get anywhere in the Solar System, we have GOT to learn how to live for indefinite periods in space. And once you can do that, why go to the bottom of a gravitational hole?

      (And before people raise the objection, this may mean living without gravity, but it doesn't mean living without an environment with a constant acceleration of around 10m/s/s.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    6. Re:Tragedy of the commons by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      I read through your chart - and agreed with most of it. Then, I looked back, searching for the missing entry. Oh, crap - have I blundered that badly? Looking again - hmmmmmm - yep, I screwed up that badly. Io is the most "earthlike" moon, with a gravity of .183. It's probably workable, but not nearly as earthlike as I implied.

      To much science fiction, and not enough science?

      I guess Mars is the best bet right now. And, that's only going to work with some kind of bio environments for a long time to come.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    7. Re:Tragedy of the commons by kermidge · · Score: 1

      I don't know exactly when I first read serious discussion of space debris viz. the need to clean it up, best I can figure is late '80s.

      Now, thirty years later, 'they' finally have decided that it is time for action. Note the passive tense. Big difference. Until the lasers are built, targeted, and fired, the butterfly nets built and orbited, the tar-babies built and sent up (multi-layered aerogel sandwiches, maybe?), it's all so much horseshit, just as always.

      Nobody's gonna actually do anything effective on a large enough scale to deal realistically with the problem until big money is lost AND lives are lost in dramatic fashion such that 'they' won't be able to run away from public and legislative pressure.

    8. Re:Tragedy of the commons by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Given the vulcanicity of Io, and the attendant seismicity (earthquakes), I'd score Io pretty low. Pending a few years of data from an on-surface seismometer (which would include radiation dosimeters etc. too ; why not), I'd be quite concerned about the ground literally shifting under an installation and popping half the seams in the place at the same time. Sure, it could be engineered around ; but do you go around making sticks to beat your own back?

      Any human settlement outside LEO is going to require as close to a closed ecological cycle as possible, purely to control costs. So, long before we're in the position to build a base on Io, we'll have much much better ability to sustain a base on re-cycling it's own water, food and shit. So, say we build Io-base in the shipyards at Ceres-base and then ship it there (roboticised ship?), wouldn't it be more sensible to just by re-build a small asteroid (for radiation shielding) and boost it up there on a 50 year mission with 10 year crew-changes (for those who don't settle well).

      SF ; but not Fantasy.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  17. Well if we wouldn't have junked by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

    Well if we wouldn't have junked the shuttles, we could have used then as the earths trash trucks. Or just give the stuff a shove and burn it up in our atmosphere. Either way talking isnt going to get anything done. Just do it lol

    --
    Jack of all trades,master of none
  18. When you know better by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    When you know it's going to be a problem sooner or later, but you'd rather ignore it now.
    space junk, energy, food, water, finances, republicans, windows xp, alcohol.

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  19. Overlooked by dohzer · · Score: 1

    Who was the fool that looked past using a laser and instead went for the 'net' or 'ballistics' options?

  20. This is a job for United Galaxy Sanitation Patrol by rwyoder · · Score: 1
  21. Magnets are the solution to every problem by macraig · · Score: 1

    I propose a giant electromagnet in orbit. Can it be solar powered? After enough junk has glommed onto it, either deorbit the whole mess or launch it at the moon. The moonfall is a better idea; then a new breed of prospectors would have a chance to reclaim the stuff.

    1. Re:Magnets are the solution to every problem by __aajfby9338 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Call me when you come up with an electromagnet that attracts the aluminum, titanium, copper, carbon fiber composites and plastics that space vehicles are made from.

      Seriously, I want one of those.

    2. Re:Magnets are the solution to every problem by macraig · · Score: 1

      Seriously, I was kidding.

    3. Re:Magnets are the solution to every problem by __aajfby9338 · · Score: 1

      Seriously, now I'm disappointed. :)

    4. Re:Magnets are the solution to every problem by macraig · · Score: 1

      I look forward to your Kickstarted project to research and invent this new magnet-for-everything. Maybe we can just cover it in Velcro? Oh wait....

    5. Re:Magnets are the solution to every problem by __aajfby9338 · · Score: 1

      That's it! From now on, we need to make our satellites out of Velcro.

    6. Re:Magnets are the solution to every problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An electromagnet powered by alternating current repels non-magnetic
      metals via induction of a counter EMF. These could be used to deflect
      an objects containing metal to collide with another object having a low
      enough relative velocity that they didn't destroy each other, but rather
      modified one or both orbits so that one falls harmlessly to earth.
      Assuming a field strong enough to be useful could be generated, the
      craft would only need to maintain it for the very brief time the object
      was within a very short distance from it.
      Pool hall aces and Foosball masters could get together and control the
      craft from earth. Plus, I'd give $1000 per object that they drop into my
      backyard.

    7. Re:Magnets are the solution to every problem by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Seriously, since a lot of satellites are composite, then you only really need to look at the set of satellites (and satellite fragments) which contain at least some ferromagnetic parts to see the [ehemm] attraction of this sort of idea. Whether one could be stable in flight (against interaction with the Earth's magnetic field) AND have large enough field of effect to sweep a usefully large volume - they're different, important, questions.

      Such devices wouldn't be able to clear up ALL debris. But to clear up some old satellites before they impact each other and make the problem even worse ... could be a worthwhile part of the solution.

      Also, this could be a feasible technique for seek-and-deorbit systems, as part of the grappling and holding system. Then attach (permanent magnet? glue? weld? tie?) something that drops it into the atmosphere, release and move onto the next target.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    8. Re:Magnets are the solution to every problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One simple solution would be giant beachball sats filled with soft urethane foam. Compact to launch and pretty effective at slowing the tiny particles of junk up there.

  22. Too bad 'space' doesn't also mean 'oceans' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad 'space' doesn't also mean 'oceans'. If every country facing the each ocean could send 1 ship each month, and collect a mere 1 ton of plastic from the mid-atlantic and mid-pacific 'sewer', we could have all the plastic removed from the worlds oceans in as little as 50 years! Instead, the plastic continues to kill creatures by the millions. Its bad that we kill so many creatures wastefully for our needs. Its much worse that we kill so many more creatures needlessly because of our bad habits.

  23. Star Wars Technology by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

    How about using some of Regan's star wars technology? Not to blow stuff up, but to give it a hard push with powerful lasers or xray beams. Push the small stuff into a degrading orbit to burn up in the atmosphere. It would be easier to target the small stuff like since you don't have to be close to it to give it a nudge. Once the little pieces are cleaned up, they can go after the less prevalent bigger pieces.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  24. value of space junk by westcountyboy · · Score: 1

    Probably some of the satellites have value to fix or parts. Especially the dead surveillance and intelligence satellites. Who owns salvaged satellites or parts ? Only maybe they have tamper mechanism, boom.

    1. Re:value of space junk by Brucelet · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be so sure. Spy tech evolves pretty fast. I don't see any reason someone would want to use a 20 year old camera in orbit, difficult to reach and not designed for reuse, instead of launching a new one that's better. Any money you save on not launching a new satellite is spent on your repair mission instead, and it's a lot more effort to end up with something less capable.

  25. Nasa's current budget by eWarz · · Score: 1

    with NASA's current budget, there is no way we US citizens can tackle this. If they want to solve this, they need to give NASA more funding.

  26. One option by Dereck1701 · · Score: 2

    I wonder if anyone has looked into placing a satellite into orbit that was able to fire extremely precise mist clouds of some liquid. It would be launched either in a polar orbit or an opposite orbital direction from most satellites. It would fire the mist clouds into the path of a piece of debris and the energy imparted (~17,000 to ~34,000 MPH relative speed) on it from the mist would eventually cause it to deorbit. The best liquid for this would probably be something that remains a liquid on the dark side of the orbit, but evaporate on the light side to presumably self deorbit if it did not hit the debris in question, and of course be cheap (maybe some kind of cooking oil?). The satellite would have to have a pretty sophisticated tracking and targeting system but its probably not out of reach. The hardest thing I imagine would be to target the clouds precisely enough and make them small enough at the required distances (several miles) and speeds so that they only effect the target debris. After the satellite ran out of liquid it could either be refilled, or self deorbit by changing orientation to fire shortly before it ran out of liquid into its orbit instead of perpendicular to it.

    1. Re:One option by Brucelet · · Score: 1

      A light mist on earth hits pretty hard at 34,000 MPH. All you're doing is adding more debris and exacerbating the problem.

    2. Re:One option by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Liquid? In a vacuum?

    3. Re:One option by Dereck1701 · · Score: 2

      There's no debating that the debris is going to get quite a shock, if it was a full satellite it could even fragment slightly. But if the mist imparts enough energy it shouldn't matter as it would impart that energy across the entire surface of the debris, de-orbiting even the fragments. The real questions are of course would it impart enough energy to deorbit the debris in a reasonable amount of time, and would the "mist" (liquid/gas) that didn't hit the debris deorbit on its own or hang in orbit medium/long term definitely creating more problems.

    4. Re: One option by Doubting+Sapien · · Score: 1

      It is a practical reality that everything in LEO is subjected to some degree of atmospheric drag. Even the Hubble Space Telescope, at a normal altitude almost twice that of the ISS will succumb to the ocassional collision with gas particles in the thermosphere. We happen to be entering the solar maximum which should heat and expand the atmosphere, exacerbating the effect. I recall this was the reason America lost the first Skylab station. The idea of bringing the atmosphere up to the orbiting debris instead of waiting for the orbit to decay is an elegant solution. Especially for large debris fields where for example the fragments of a destroyed satellite still pretty much share the same orbit. You would maneuver a de-orbiting tanker traveling in the exact opposite direction, release a gas cloud that will collide headon with the target. Each gas particle will slow it down and lower it's altitude, sending it on its way into the thicker lower atmosphere. The gas itself would pose little hazard, most likely dissipating harmlessly. I think the biggest drawback may be that it probably wouldn't be very cost effective unless you can de-orbit multiple targets at once. In the case of stray small objects that are not trackable by radar, you simply don't know.

      --
      ========== "Hello World" in my programming language of choice: ATG - LET THERE BE LIFE - TAG ==========
  27. cheaper solution by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    just shoot down any satellite the Chinese send up, they've lost the right to use the shared orbital space of this earth with their irresponsible creation of horrendous debris field

    1. Re:cheaper solution by Dereck1701 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You do realize that the Chinese "contribution" to the space debris problem is relatively insignificant compared to the amount of debris placed in orbit by the US and Russia right? I'm not saying it shouldn't be condemned, but the fact that they created 2% of the problem in one idiotic act compared to decades of continual stupidity by the US & Russia space agencies shouldn't given undue weight.

    2. Re:cheaper solution by Brucelet · · Score: 1

      This will not exacerbate the problem in any way

    3. Re:cheaper solution by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      but they did it within the most useful orbital band, not all orbits are equal

  28. Space Junk Energy Shield by natex84 · · Score: 1

    Maybe some of the space junk will reflect some of the sun's light energy and reduce global warming...

  29. That's nice.. but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about some acknowledgement of there being a secret space program that makes the shuttles look like tinker toys, a break-away civilization that is completely separate from what we know as civilization, and that NASA is still ran by NAZI's and their descendants? We have the technology that would make problems like this vanish like taking out the weekly trash , except 1000000 times more efficient.

    All signs point to Majestic/powers that be doing what they please, and if one of these debris hit earth, they will be laughing sitting in their own power network / underground bases, and the tons of other shit that has been built. (paid for by your tax dollars in black budget funds and drug dealing cia money by the way)

  30. So nothing will be done about it? by aliquis · · Score: 1

    "Our understanding of the growing space debris problem can be compared with our understanding of the need to address Earthâ(TM)s changing climate some 20 years ago,"

    So nothing will be done about it? =P

    1. Re:So nothing will be done about it? by Hentes · · Score: 1

      The way it goes it's more likely that we will have armored satellites capable of withstanding an impact than that we will clean LEO.

  31. Re:Well , GOOD idea actually Space junk is expensi by Brucelet · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the real world, that's a whole lot harder than it sounds. It's easy enough to get to an arbitrary LEO satellite, assuming you know its orbit well enough, but any dismantling and reusing would be extraordinarily difficult. This counts doubly for decommissioned satellites or debris which could be tumbling in some arbitrary fashion with no way to control. Plus, manufacturing in space is really really hard, as we've learned over 30 years of the Space Shuttle and 15 of the ISS. You probably need to launch lots of equipment (plus maybe a human or two, though no existing manned vehicle is up to the task) to make it work, and now you're doing much more work and spending much more money than you would just building something from scratch. And then of course here's the kicker: you've done all this work, and now (assuming you didn't leave anything new behind) you've removed one single piece of space junk. With the mass you've already needed to bring up to do your repair/retrofit, it's highly unlikely you'll have fuel to get to another object in even a very close orbit, and so you have to head home and launch another mission. And another. For every single piece of junk out there. It'd be absolutely impossible to make this work on a large enough scale to do anything about the debris problem.

  32. Rocket Magnets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Easy - deploy a battery of rocket-powered electromagnets, and another (autonomous vehicle?) to deploy nets that can snag up the rest into chunks, that way they're at least out of the way - and time may allow them to aggregate for further processing (space rotor shear?).

  33. Kessler Syndrome - feedback runaway space debris by pyalot · · Score: 1

    It's theorized that this is a possibility where collisions between space debris produce more debris and rise the likelyhood of further collisions. This would lead to a rapid feedback loop as collisions cascade. This would likely render space travel impossible for the next couple thousand years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

  34. No one is going to clean out orbit, not yet by Nyder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Until we have a big ass disaster because of space debris, no one will do anything except talk about it.

    In case no one pays attention to Human history, we do NOT usually do anything until after someone bad has happened, then we run around like chickens with our heads cut off and remove more human rights.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  35. Where is Adam Quark now? by Unixnoteunuchs · · Score: 2
    1. Re:Where is Adam Quark now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I searched the comments specifically for this series! Thanks for remembering. :)

      Here's the pilot episode

  36. GW 20 Years Ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To follow the global warming analogy, we will soon find out that there is *of enough* space junk, since twenty years ago alarmists thought the globe was cooling.

  37. metal for the moon ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    could the metal there be reused as a moon base ? given x amount of energy has been used already to get the boosters, panels, screwdrivers etc
    not sure how easy it would be to cast a net then send the stuff to the moon to be reused later on.. of course easier said then done.

  38. Re:Well , GOOD idea actually Space junk is expensi by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    But maybe you get to salvage an original Intel 8086!
    And who knows what crap is flying over our heads. Bubble memory, perhaps. Soviet Z80 clones. Solar panels that were incredibly expensive and rare 15 years ago. Worn out capacitors. I guess it's worth it to some people. The other trouble is, what if you have some mission failure and end up adding to the junk pool.

  39. Really Ironic Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Star Wars finally realized...perhaps all this space debris will act as a ICBM defense system? If not, the lasers we develop to get rid of the space debris will develop into the 'star wars' dream.

    so many cataclysmic disaster movies about asteroids, comets, solar flares, zombie apocalypse, etc. that cause the fall of civilization. imagine all of our communications and gps satellites being knocked out by a series of space debris collisions. so many little empires laid waste by trash in space.

    how much space debris would it take to cause 'global cooling'? how much would it take to protect us from a strong and direct CME?

    1. Re:Really Ironic Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just looking at the sunny side of things...

  40. Motivation.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not necessarily for altruistic reasons, but you could probably convince some country's defense department that developing technology that can remove debris from orbit would be useful. It would help if, when explaining this to them, you put 'debris' in quotes....

  41. I don't believe it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This I don't believe: "Our understanding of the growing space debris problem can be compared with our understanding of the need to address Earth’s changing climate some 20 years ago,"

    I don't believe in Man Made Space Debris. It's naturally occurring, it will not cause any harm to humans or cute animals or the environment. This is just a scam to enrich a small number of researchers (we should demand to see their emails!) and promote a no-growth ideology: read: they think that anything resembling a decent standard of living is evil, and with to inflict us all back to the era of hunter gatherers, although the society the envision would be matriarchal hunter gatherers.

    If they really believed this non-sense, then let them leave. The earth, that is.

  42. Singularities are the solution to every problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let make a stable black hole in orbit. The more debris it draws in, the more debris it will attract. Eventually, it will even solve the global pollution problem as well. Win-Win.

  43. Science Fiction is too good for 'em... by VAXcat · · Score: 1

    Do not give that which is holy to dogs, and cast not your pearls before swine. SF is way too good for the average illiterate student.

    --
    There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
  44. Great White Hanky by Dabido · · Score: 1

    Solution seems very simple. We wait for the coming of the great white hanky and it will all get cleaned up at once.

    --
    Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)