Slashdot Mirror
White House Issues Strategies To Combat Growing Orbital Debris Risks (wsj.com)
White House space officials have explicitly ruled out international treaties to combat hazards from orbital debris, even as they roll out strategies to revamp U.S. responses to the growing problem. From a report: President Donald Trump on Monday signed a directive formally establishing the Department of Commerce as the lead agency in providing collision-risk data to commercial satellite operators. The order, as expected, also calls for stepped-up efforts to develop voluntary industry standards covering satellite construction, orbit locations, and de-orbit plans -- all intended to reduce collision risks posed by aging satellites and thousands of pieces of debris circling the earth. Mr. Trump said the changes, among others he is championing, aim to ensure that "America will always be first in space" in both military and commercial arenas. The Pentagon will continue to maintain the central catalog of orbiting spacecraft and debris posing potential hazards to U.S. government and private satellites. But commerce department officials will have the authority to pass on that information to the industry, combined with data gathered from private or foreign government sources. Further reading: President Trump Directs Pentagon To Create New 'Space Force' Military Branch.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Know those nets polluting the ocean, yes, tie them on a rocket, and pray for no Kessler effect! Easy Humm
All by yourself without treaties...and voluntary self regulation? good luck with that. .The .DoC .has .done .so .well .handling .the .internet .too .!
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
And right there you have ANOTHER mission for the new "Space Force". I had previously suggested that the "Space Force" should be structured like the Coast Guard; in that role, preventing or removing "hazards to navigation" would be right in their wheelhouse. SAR. Maintenance of navigational beacons. Removing - harvesting, more likely - junk or derelict satellites.
The test was especially troubling because it exposed the vulnerability of America's dependence on low-orbiting satellites, which are used for military communications, smart bombs and surveillance. In theory, last week's exercise could give Beijing the capability to knock out such satellites - a realisation that underlay the protests from Washington.
Goodbye, Slashdot!
That would work right up until we need to stop the cooling. Might want to start building a train while working on the first project.
It is uncomfortable for me that a U.S. president is said to do things that are developed, communicated, and recommended by agencies and staff.
I think credit should be given in detail to everyone who was involved.
I doubt this has anything to do with the (probably violating many treaties) "Space Force" he wanted to create. But in order to get buy in from him, the agencies convinced him that this was all his idea and what he asked for. And it seems to have worked, so I really don't care who is taking credit (we don't want to burst his bubble, do we?).
Only when things go well. When things go poorly, the underlings are the first to fall on their sword under a bus.
Any war in orbit leads to more deadly space junk, ending humanity's road to space.
Space wars can destroy whole continents with one asteroid, and end life on earth.
The Chinese test was against a satellite that was already de-orbiting and barely above the atmosphere. Of course China conducted their test without any regard to the satellite debris that continued orbiting. Earth based ASAT weapons are currently useless against the military and intelligence satellites which orbit in much higher orbits. The US already has a viable weapons platform capable of destroying satellites orbiting the earth. X-37B
any one else feel like Trump is trying to remove science from space by going outside of NASA.
Pretty much the same as any other CEO... He is the CEO of the country, so gets credit for the R&D.
You're replying to a headline and article that credits the White House, not the President.
This space intentionally left blank
Space mining will arrive as soon as they are done with creating AI and autonomous driving.
I'm all for giving people credit for their work. In my daily work, I advise, mentor, coach, and team-up with others whenever possible. During our daily scrum, when we report what has been completed, I make it a point to say "Al did this really cool thing." I do not mention "Al did this really cool thing exactly the way I told him to" :) I hand out credit and congratulations, and deflect when they object with "but Ray you're the one who designed it", because part of my leadership style is to give out recognition rather than seek out recognition.
Having said that ...
The summary says "the President signed ...", and that is in fact the news. That Bob Jones, an intern in Boston, suggested something isn't news. When it becomes national policy by the President signing it, that's news.
Also, if the president chooses a bad leader him, choosing an art major with no relevant experience as Chief Security Officer, whose fault is it when the organization gets hacked big time? If a company president sets up a compensation structure that rewards opening accounts, and creates a corporate culture where being sneaky and underhanded is the norm, whose fault is it when low-level employees do sneaky, underhanded things to get new accounts open? Sure, the low-level employees are responsible for their own personal behavior, but the leader is responsible for what's going on throughout the organization, policies and widespread practices. I hold them responsible for bad or for good, when it comes to the broad policies.
Somebody suggested that policy, someone else probably suggested the opposite, or something totally different, and the leader chose and set the policy.
Does that mean the leader shouldn't point out where the idea came from? In a positive way, I think they should. I try to. And whatever policies Trump selects and puts into force, I'll hold him responsible for - credit or blame.
This is actually not a terrible point in that it would demonstrate being able to deorbit materials in a cost-effective manner, but I think you would burn too much fuel matching different inclinations to collect many satellites. Also I think overall the composition of satellites would be disappointingly low on valuable minerals.
The USA and Russia both tested such weapons on LEO objects. Chia was not the first to do this. They where the ones that made the biggest mess though..
I don't think you are cutting insolation by any measurable amount with space debris.
Insolation is improved with every collision. For a given mass, total insolation is inversely proportional to the debris radius.
In Donald Trump's presidency that's the case but it was NOT the case under all previous presidents. I know of a several incidents where the commander in chief took full responsibility for the actions of executive staff that he likely had nothing to do with. But don't expect that same behavior from the current occupant, he'll blame everyone but himself even when he's directly involved. That's what happens when you elect a narcissist.
Or maybe he's just doing president stuff and doesn't care about whatever you consider "real issue".
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
It's not violating any treaties. The move is actually more of a reorganization than creating something new - isolating the space-related units from other forces and consolidating them.
And as for "has anything to do with it" - do you think Obama invented Obamacare?
Projects like this lie in desk drawers for decades, and get presented to any president that happens along. The one who decides to give the project a go-ahead gets to claim the credit.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
It's not violating any treaties.
I was talking about the original vision when he named it months ago:
Trump in March 2018:
"Space is a war-fighting domain, just like the land, air, and sea," Trump told a an audience of service members at the Marine Corps Air Station Miramar. "We may even have a Space Force, develop another one, Space Force. We have the Air Force, we'll have the Space Force."
This sort of treaties tends to be 1. unenforceable, 2. overly costly for presented efficiency.
Instead of focusing on solving the problem you focus on adhering to the letter of the treaty. You implement regulations that stand conflict with existing ones, you implement from scratch solutions required while you already possess superior alternatives, you need to establish a whole unit responsible for coordinating the efforts internationally and screening all launches completely independently from whatever you already have in place... and then it doesn't mean shit, because Brasil or some other India launches a new experimental rocket that followed the treaty to the dot, then blew up in orbit and produced ten thousand new debris to track.
Going the route of domestic 'best effort' is simply a more practical approach.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
In Twitler's case it's the Dems that get blamed. He'll claim there's some law the Dems passed that requires him to do it (even though it was really passed by Republicans.) Even with control of the house and the senate he can't manage to get anything passed.
What a fucking loser he is. Jeebus H Christ, I almost wish we had W back.
Look on the bright side! Trump has promised to make the Martians pay for the cleanup..
Space living quarters with ion drive and a number of teeny ion robot rockets. Attach to debris, de-orbit, which doesn't take that much, rocket flies back to living quarters ship.
For that matter, don't need living quarters just a little remote control ion ship.
A few dozen ships and ground techs to run it.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
The standard line of reasoning for most people seems to be:
.. giveHimCreditForEverythingGoodThatHappens();
.. blameHisStaffForEverythingBadThatHappens();
.. blameHimForEverythingBadThatHappens();
.. giveHisStaffCreditForEverythingGoodThatHappens();
if (you like the President)
{
}
else if (you dislike the President)
{
}
This isn't the first President who's taken undue credit or shirked deserved blame, nor will he be the last. And it works the same across the entire political spectrum. e.g. Clinton got credit for balancing the budget, while blaming the Republican Congress for making the budget cuts which actually balanced the budget.
And as for "has anything to do with it" - do you think Obama invented Obamacare?
Do you think it was Obama (or the Democratic Party) that started calling it that?
Idea: fire Trump into orbit so that his soft body parts can aborb some of that space junk.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
I am always troubled when I find myself not disagreeing with an A/C.
I'm OK with putting children in cages.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
And as for "has anything to do with it" - do you think Obama invented Obamacare?
Nope, the name and most of the shit in the bill is definitely the result of Republicans. Obama had a plan for universal healthcare, not what he was forced to push out through concessions.
Considering DNC just killed the bill that would put a stop to it, you might want to remove that "blockquote".
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2