Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Real-Time Map of All the Objects In Earth's Orbit

Posted by Soulskill on from the except-for-that-mickey-mantle-home-run dept.

rastos1 writes: It started as a passion project in April for 18-year-old James Yoder, an alum of FIRST Robotics, the high school robotics competition. He wanted to learn more about 3D graphics programming and WebGL, a JavaScript API. It's stuffin.space, a real-time, 3D-visualized map of all objects looping around Earth, from satellites to orbital trash. In total, stuffin.space tracks 150,000 objects. Type in a satellite name to scope out its altitude, figure out its age, group satellites by type, and so on.

41 comments

  1. stuffin.space by __aabppq7737 · · Score: 2

    is succumbing to the /. effect

    just kidding. It's a bunch of huge resources

  2. I wondered where this went! by macs4all · · Score: 2

    I remember when the G5 Tower was first introduced, to demonstrate the compute-power of the G5, they had some guy come on stage and show a real-time animated display of all the (I assume unclassified) objects in Earth orbit.

    IIRC, it was announced that the software that did this was going to be available... And then, nothing. I just assumed the MIBs put the kibosh on the release for some "National Security" type-excuse.

    Glad to see that this is becoming available.

    So nice to see that we live in a coun-- Hey! Who are you! You can't come in h

    1. Re:I wondered where this went! by delt0r · · Score: 1

      The classified ones are in these databases as well. It turns out its really hard to hide things in space. Amateur space photographers even take photos of them.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
  3. Drives me nuts by WillRobinson · · Score: 2

    When I was a kid, all we had for visualizations was a milk carton and a candle. All these things you can do from your basement make me sick!

    Really nice job though, wish I could hire him lol

    1. Re:Drives me nuts by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      When I was a kid, all we had for visualizations was a milk carton and a candle.

      Luxury! When I was a lad, we lived in a milk carton by the side of the road.

      With no candle, either!

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:Drives me nuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      When I was a kid, all we had for visualizations was a milk carton and a candle.

      Luxury! When I was a lad, we lived in a milk carton by the side of the road.

      With no candle, either!

      Man that sounds like a great life.

      When I was a lad my picture was on a milk carton because I was kidnapped by a human trafficking ring and forced to perform "candle shows".

    3. Re:Drives me nuts by steve_bryan · · Score: 1

      The product is called Freefall and I have a version 1.2 copy running on a G4 Tower Mac connected the an HDMI switch so I can watch it on a big screen. It is, unfortunately, PPC only so it doesn't run on current Macs. There was an 'update' sold for a while that ran on intel also (I think, memory is tricky). But it was more like a redesign which just wasn't as nice as the original. The two names attached to the program, XtremeMac and Advanced Analytic System Design, seem to have passed from this world.

      You can view some of the same stuff with Starry Night Pro on the Mac.

  4. Misconception about space "pollution" by Eloking · · Score: 2

    While the map is quite awesome, I'm quite sure we'll see a lot of "news" bashing about how "polluted" our space is. After all, if I show this screenshot to anyone, most people will assume our space is really polluted (Wall-E style) : http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-...

    Truth is, the dot on the map are far from accurate in size (if it was the case, the "debris" would be ~100km in size). Furthermore, most of those debris will eventually deorbit and reenter the earth atmosphere in the next decade.

    --
    Elok
    1. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For navigational purposes though the vague area even something small like a wrench occupies is really important.

      Something with sufficient mass = bad
      Something with sufficient velocity = really bad

      Not knowing where either of those things are in space = REALLY REALLY BAD

      Having the ability to remove that stuff = good

    2. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah it's not that bad. If we had a map with a dot for every abandoned plastic bottle on Earth, it would be incredibly more dense.

    3. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by Eloking · · Score: 1

      Of course.

      As I said, the map is awesome and really useful. Sadly, my point is that most of the people that are going to check will do so only to see how "polluted" space is.

      --
      Elok
    4. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by CBM · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hey dude, it's a really nice visualization website done by a high school kid. Don't kill the buzz.

      But now that you've diverted the topic, let me tell you that you're full of BS. stuffin.space doesn't show it, but space debris is a serious problem. stuffin.space shows the largest satellites, upper stages and debris chunks, but there are billions more pieces of debris that are too small to show on a website, but large enough to cause serious damage.

      It really doesn't take much to damage a spacecraft. I have some experience with this: I've worked with two different spacecraft that experienced "micrometeoroid" hits that damaged sensitive equipment. But really, in low earth orbit, micrometeoroid means human-made debris. There are plenty of flecks of paint and fragments of silicon that can slice through delicate spacecraft apertures or pop a solar panel.

      When we ran the numbers using NASA's best simulation of space debris at the time, we were horrified to find out the amount of 20-50 micron pieces of debris that had enough energy to puncture sensitive detector windows and films. And this simulation only had data from before the huge space collisions of the past decade, which have probably doubled or tripled the total debris load. In our plans for a new satellite project, a damaging hit by space debris was one of the serious factors limiting mission lifetime.

      And no, most of the debris will not de-orbit. Yes, anything within 600 km or so altitude will likely be affected by atmospheric and solar drag and re-enter within our lifetimes, but there is a huge orbital phase space where debris will essentially be stuck there forever. NASA requires its missions to have a debris mitigation plan.

      So, thanks for poo-pooing space debris. Some high school guy's website sure was a great soapbox for you to tear a straw man apart.

    5. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by PsychoSlashDot · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Of course.

      my point is that most of the people that are going to check will do so only to see how "polluted" space is.

      Which is... very.

      Would you stake your life on being able to run a Kerbal Space Program moon-landing mission without hitting any of the DEB (debris) objects? Would you stake your life on being able to run a KSP to launch something into a stable LEO that could loop around the planet 100 times without hitting any? How about a thousand times?

      Communications and navigation satellites - to say nothing of the ISS and its resupply missions - require orbits that never intersect any of the crap up there. And while obviously there are hundreds of miles between each item you see at any given time, sit and watch the display for a while and try to predict somewhere that's "safe".

      LEO is polluted, heavily. Space programs are mandated to be safe these days, with very little tolerated risk. Every GPS satellite or comms satellite we launch makes things significantly harder, and it's not a linear progression. Worse, the delta-V required to actually DO anything about this problem is hugely problematic as well. So we're screwing up our gateway to not-here, and doing it in a manner that makes it massively difficult to fix.

      Yes, lots of this will de-orbit. In decades, or longer.

      --
      "Oh no... he found the .sig setting."
    6. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by FalcDot · · Score: 1

      You wanna be really scared?

      Use the 'Groups' button to show the Iridium 33 Collision Debris.

      That's from ONE collision between two satellites.

    7. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you serious? Do you have any idea how big space is? It is pretty hard to get hit but all the stuff you see on that map. Granted there is a lot more stuff around earth than anywhere else in our solar system. But it is still nothing compared to the amount of space it is actually floating in.

    8. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WOW, someone needs to read SevenEves!!!

    9. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by Eloking · · Score: 1

      C'mon I'm not killing any buzz. I love that map and I've even added it to my bookmark.

      And I know how dangerous those debris are. Some of those debris top 10 km/s (36 000 km/h) and if're you're heading the other way...well you get the picture.

      My point was about the misconception of space pollution. Normal folk imagine we're going to end up like that scene in Wall-E where a rocket have to pass through a wall of debris to leave earth orbit. It's a huge additional challenge for all space mission but we're handling it quite well so far. Moreover, if we're more careful about making debris for the next decade, most of them will disappear by themselves (IFAIK, orbit need to be over 2000 km to be considered completely stable, but maybe there's a glitch in my memory)

      --
      Elok
    10. Re:Misconception about space "pollution" by Eloking · · Score: 1

      Sure it's still very polluted. But to be honest, any pollution is "too much" pollution don't you agree?

      --
      Elok
  5. A .space domain! by MobyDisk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I rarely post to Slashdot unless I have something to contribute, but this time I just have to say:

    WOW.

    1) I didn't know there was a .space domain.
    2) Holy moly that is beautiful.

    1. Re:A .space domain! by CaptSlaq · · Score: 2

      Agreed. This kind of stuff is what attracted me to /. in 2000. More of it please.

    2. Re:A .space domain! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Say thanks to HMTL5

  6. No Moon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously it ain't go no substance that you can depend on.

  7. Coming from a background in college-level robotics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FIRST robotics doesn't carry a lot of weight with me.

    That said, the necessary understanding of trig functions, ellipses/conics, polar/cartesian 3d geometry, JavaScript, and WebGL displayed by James Yoder have left me stunned. Hopefully there is a recruiter for MIT, CalTech, CMU, or Cornell seeing his work.

    I'll look forward to facing him as an opponent over the next several years. I anticipate I will be outmatched.

  8. International Space Station by rastos1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Interestingly if you lookup ISS (ZARYA) you will see another dot "just next" to it - Progress-M 28M cargo spaceship with supplies for ISS.

  9. FYI: Hubble is "HST" by MobyDisk · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you are looking, the hubble space telescope is HST or 1990-37B. If you want to find more designations, follow the external links in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Designator like the NSSDC Master Catalog.

  10. Wow! by nospam007 · · Score: 2

    Finally! News for nerds! Wow!

    I thought it would never happen again.

    1. Re:Wow! by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      Finally! News for nerds! Wow!

      Based on the number of replies there is at about 30 nerds sticking with /.
      :-(

  11. Why no spy sats? by mveloso · · Score: 1

    Funny that none of the recon birds are there.

  12. Duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your mean like this?
    It's old it uses insecure Java and have had it on a link for over 10 years.

    http://science.nasa.gov/realtime/jtrack/3d/JTrack3D.html/

    1. Re:Duh by g01d4 · · Score: 1

      There used to be a Google Earth Satellite Add-On provided by AGI that I used several years ago. Can't find it any more.

  13. Really really nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It looks nice, and runs smoothly on my oldish computer (tho it got pretty hot pretty fast!). Well done!

    - You can clearly see the equator line where the geostationary satellites form a tight ring. This is the same ring (at 1/2 height) that might someday have space elevators
    - You can also see a wider ring at an angle to the equator ring at the same altitude. Not sure what this is but it looks like it's about 20-ish degrees off the equator plane, so maybe it has something to do with the tilt of the earth
    - There are other patterns in there, in the poles, that are interesting
    - Everything is animated, you can zoom in over your spot on earth and see the graceful motion of satellites overhead. Definitely have to use this on a clear night in the country and compare against satellites in the sky.

    Good post!

  14. stupid TLD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i refuse to visit any douche.whatever sites

  15. 150K objects?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The unclassified catalog available from Space-Track has on the order of 16K objects. Where do the other 136K objects come from.

  16. This guy doesn't need a resume! by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    This is fantastic work. It's a great demonstration of what WebGL can do, but also a great demonstration of what James Yoder can do with it.

    James, if you're looking for a job, we need to talk!

  17. Chrome vs. Firefox vs. IE by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    It works fine on all three. But what I thought was interesting was that when I opened the page in IE, the computer's fan started revving up. As I zoomed in and out and panned around, it really got going. Chrome and Firefox...both cool as a cucumber. That says something about the optimization (or lack thereof) in IE's rendering engine.

    1. Re:Chrome vs. Firefox vs. IE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't work in Chrome in OSX (Mavericks). Weird. It only shows the orbit lines if you click on something, but not the coloured circles.

  18. Amazing by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of eve online. But more responsive! Thats a really amazing project. Congrats. Makes sense that there are only 40 comments. All the real cool stuff never gets any attention round here...

    --
    -
    1. Re:Amazing by goofyspouse · · Score: 1

      > Makes sense that there are only 40 comments

      Damn straight...we are all too mystified to post.

  19. The Moon by thoi412 · · Score: 1

    First off, this is amazing! I would love it if the moon were included just for the effect of scale.

    --
    "Whoever loves instruction loves knowledge, But he who hates correction is stupid." Proverbs 12:1 (NKJV)