top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 112 points 4 months ago (7 children)

Half the size of a pickup truck? So like, a normal car?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 64 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    More like 1/3 the size of a zambonie. Or 11/3 the size of two penguins on a foosball table.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 104 points 4 months ago (12 children)

    Oh thank God... We almost had to use the metric system there didn't we?

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    We were within a hair's breadth of that awful fate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    We almost had to mention standard cars, which are also half the size.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Americans don't drive cars, so they don't know how big they might be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    A car?? Is that some kind of libural version of my furd f300000 king ranch pedestrian killer edition truck?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 68 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Is the measure in Imperial pick ups,

    or metric pick ups?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 50 points 4 months ago*

    Yep, they are in Low Earth Orbit. A place that has a very, very small amount of air, so the satellites experience drag, lose speed, eventually the propellant tanks run dry, and they burn up in the atmosphere. The ISS experiences the same thing, which is why its altitude slowly falls, then you see a sharp increase as they push to a slightly higher orbit.

    At the altitude the SpaceX satellites are at, they only passively stay up for a few years. With the onboard propulsion giving them each another few years.

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 4 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 37 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Please let one land on my house so I can sue SpaceX and retire early.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

    One fell in a farmer's field in Saskatchewan. Dude got a hassle, some publicity, and a nominal fee of a grand or something.

    edit: here's a mastodon thread where astronomer Sam Lawler lives nearby and visits the site with media:

    SpaceX wreckage in Saskatchewan

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    I don't remember that happening. I would actually be surprised if a satellite would survive reentry with basically anything left of it. If you want to return something from orbit you need heat shield or you're not getting it back.

    Even the ISS is expected to completely burn up and that's much higher mass than a starlink satellite

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Donnie Darko but it's Musk's space junk instead of a jet engine.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago* (11 children)

    Complaining about Kressler Syndrome

    Complaining about Starlink

    Pick one, asshole. As shitty as Musk is, Starlink is in too low of an orbit to cause Kressler Syndrome

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

    Every time somebody mentions Kessler syndrome they always seem to forget that low earth orbit is an area literally bigger than the earth's surface. There's about 10,000 of them and they are spread out over an area bigger than the surface of the earth. Meanwhile there are way more than 10,000 trucks in the world and apparently they are twice the size, and yet there are huge swaths of land that do not currently have a truck on them. I think we'll be okay.

    Although I do accept they are probably irritating for astronomers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    Collisions aren't theoretical, near misses are so common that there's an entire department at NASA dedicated to detecting them and warning satellite owners to adjust course, I know because we were contacted about a possible collision involving our cubesat. Prior to megaconstellations being deployed if humanity stopped adjusting satellite orbits there would be a collision within a month, now there would be a collision within 5 days. It's only a matter of time until both satellites on a collision course don't have the ability to adjust course (engine failure or no propulsion/fuel/comms). In the event of a Carrington-style solar flare there's a good chance a decent percentage of satellites would be knocked out, making this hypothetical into a reality. Further, we can only currently track objects down to about 10cm, but NASA estimates suggest about 500,000 objects exist between 1-10cm in size in LEO.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (7 replies)
    [–] 15 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Half the size of a pickup truck… a Mazda compact, or a jacked up GMC Hemi half ton?

    Even just saying Ford F150 gives a lot of leeway.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 15 points 4 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago

    Where I live, we have pickup trucks half the size of pickup trucks.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Is this not part of the plan. I seem to recall they are designed to entirely burn up on reentry.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago

    There could be cubes the size of gorillas.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago

    Yeah that's what happens to absolutely everything in Low Earth Orbit in just a few years. Well, unless you keep pushing them back up like we do to the International Space Station.

    These satellites are doing exactly what they're intended to do. These are actually pretty small satellites overall, there are a lot up there quite a bit larger that deorbit and burn up on re-entry just fine as well.

    That's part of the reason things are sent to LEO specifically, because their orbits naturally degrade and they naturally deorbit themselves without needing any assistance or fuel. It also means if a satellite in LEO fails quicker than planned, is put in an incorrect orbit due to a launch issue, or just failed prematurely, it will fail-safe and deorbit without any assistance.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    return to sender

    preferably on his head

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    Privatizing space sure did make things more efficient, puh-raise JEE-zuz-ah!

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›