Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

nemom t1_jczrkrs wrote

> ...shows a low-cost way to reduce space junk

by becoming space junk.

1

malepitt t1_jczsmwf wrote

...by equipping their craft with a drag sail, deliberately designed to speed orbital decay. [Reading- how does it work?]

18

OneFutureOfMany t1_jd04fvb wrote

That has nothing to do with AA batteries.

Why spend $10k to launch a satellite who’s batteries (Energizer?) will die and leave it orbiting uselessly for 4.5 years?

But yeah a drag sail can reduce time in orbit.

I’m glad some students are getting some experience designing and launching satellites. It’ll be a major step for their careers.

4

nemom t1_jczyyr9 wrote

Sure, it proves you can shorten the time something is space junk by increasing its drag, but A) the engineers already knew that and 2) that does not mean it won't be space junk for the next five years.

−1

mailslot t1_jd0x4qq wrote

And if it doesn’t deploy: space junk

−4

DukeOfGeek OP t1_jczshku wrote

Tell us you didn't read the article without saying you didn't read the article.

4

nemom t1_jczyqqq wrote

I did read the article. It will orbit the planet for five years. The batteries will run out long before that, so it will be space junk most of its life. Yes, they are showing how increasing drag can shorten the time something is space junk, but it is still going to be space junk.

10

Stupid-Idiot-Balls t1_jd3ax9x wrote

Short lived space junk is not the problem and is never what astronomer/engineers talk about when they say space junk is a problem.

3

nemom t1_jd3d1ky wrote

Ah, yes... How many times have I heard an astronomer say, "Damn it! A satellite passed in front of my sensor. Oh, wait... The catalog says it's gonna burn up in three years, not seventeen, so it's OK."?

0

WholemealBred t1_jczt6ee wrote

Tell us how that didn’t just create more space junk… it’s r/technicallythetruth

1

timberwolf0122 t1_jd0wxce wrote

The cube is a proof of concept, we now know that a drag sail is highly effective as well as light and cheap, reducing junks life 6 fold and that’s huge.

7

WholemealBred t1_jd9tjpc wrote

But that’s not happened yet. It’s just more junk at this stage.

1

timberwolf0122 t1_jda2tee wrote

Not if they are continuing to monitor it, which I imagine they will to see how long the deorbit takes, it’ll become junk once it begins to burn up

1

WholemealBred t1_jda3vlp wrote

Just because it will head towards reentry with 5 years instead of 25 years doesn’t mean it’s not space junk. it’s still space junk….

1

timberwolf0122 t1_jda49ab wrote

Right…. And they will likely monitor its trajectory over the next 5 years to see how the cube and tiny drag chute behave, this would make it an active experiment.

If something happens and that cube starts gaining altitude because of an unforeseen interaction, we’ll that’s something you want to know about before you put it on something big and have it go sailing off somewhere

1

WholemealBred t1_jda58eg wrote

You realise it’s based of projections and not monitored for 5 years? RemindMe! 5 years

1