Lemmy.World

166,333 readers
7,406 users here now

The World's Internet Frontpage Lemmy.World is a general-purpose Lemmy instance of various topics, for the entire world to use.

Be polite and follow the rules โš– https://legal.lemmy.world/tos

Get started

See the Getting Started Guide

Donations ๐Ÿ’—

If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.

If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us

Ko-Fi (Donate)

Bunq (Donate)

Open Collective backers and sponsors

Patreon

Liberapay patrons

GitHub Sponsors

Join the team ๐Ÿ˜Ž

Check out our team page to join

Questions / Issues

More Lemmy.World

Follow us for server news ๐Ÿ˜

Mastodon Follow

Chat ๐Ÿ—จ

Discord

Matrix

Alternative UIs

Monitoring / Stats ๐ŸŒ

Service Status ๐Ÿ”ฅ

https://status.lemmy.world

Mozilla HTTP Observatory Grade

Lemmy.World is part of the FediHosting Foundation

founded 1 year ago
ADMINS
1
 
 

This wccftech article is pretty loose and doesn't provide much citations. I also have a very low opinion of wccftech.

But I'm also asking if anyone has more links and/or data to this story? Most people at RealTesla knows that Starlink satellites are at a low orbit, so there's a high chance that they fall out of the sky (and they are expected to fall out of the sky on a regular basis). But hopefully this can be the start of a good discussion backed with more legitimate sources.

EDIT: The focus should be on the following paragraph:

It shows that as of July 15, 353 Starlink satellites had burnt up in the atmosphere, and this figure jumped by more than 200 spacecraft to 568 satellites as of the latest readings. As a comparison, only 248 satellites had burned up at the start of this year, so the number destroyed during the last two months is higher than the figure for the first seven months of the year.

2
 
 

SpaceX's Starlink satellite internet constellation has lost more than two hundred satellites in low Earth orbit (LEO) since July, according to data from a satellite tracking website. This is the first time that Starlink has lost a significant number of satellites in a short time period, and these losses are typically influenced by solar flares that cause changes in orbit and damage or destroy the spacecraft. The nature of the satellites, i.e. their model, is unclear, and if they are the newer Starlink satellites that SpaceX regularly launches, then the firm will have to conduct at least nine Falcon 9 launches to make up for the satellites lost.

Since it is a SpaceX subsidiary, Starlink has rapidly built the world's largest LEO satellite internet constellation and the world's largest satellite constellation by rapidly launching them through the Falcon 9 rocket. However, upgrades to the spacecraft and constraints with the Falcon 9 have reduced the number of satellites that the firm can launch, with its latest launches seeing roughly 22 satellites per launch for a nearly one-third reduction over the 60 satellites that SpaceX launched during the early days of the Starlink buildout.

The newer satellites are second-generation spacecraft that SpaceX received the launch authorization from the FCC less than a year back. They are more powerful and are thus larger and heavier than the earlier satellites, which limits the Falcon 9 ability to squeeze large numbers inside a single payload fairing.

Satellites in orbit or space have to face off against various hazards that can damage or put them out of commission. SpaceX faced one such event in February 2022, when a solar flare damaged at least 40 of the recently launched satellites. SpaceX confirmed this and shared that the heat from the solar flare increased atmospheric density and made it impossible for the satellites to maintain their trajectory.

view more: next โ€บ