But it is vulnerable as fuck to the railroad car with nails. All you need to get rid of all that satellites is just launch few dozen tons of nails on the polar orbit at the same altitude and release them with blast. Within few days all that satellites would become a cloud of rubble.
So, that satellites constellation is too vulnerable to be something more than just satellite constellation.
To use it in supposed manner, for all that ultimate surveillance and control things, elites have to be shure that there are no any power left that could launch a few dozen tons of nails into the orbit. Otherwise they could fall into situation when such power could easily blackmail them as it want, since elites tied all their important stuff to that highly vulnerable structure.
And the role of such power could be played by any rogue military commander with access to ballistic missile (it could perfectly launch few tons of nails to starlink orbit) or those who work in space industry with access to launches.
At best Starlink is a beta version of such elites plan. Proof-of-concept, nothing more. Or elites lost last bits of intellect and believe in their own dreams completely.
Small debris and unused nails will just burn in high atmosphere without any significant effect on surface. In the worst case you will just have slightly increased meteor activity within few years after wiping out starlink constellation.
Really it is overhyped concern in all. Not everything that goes up will fall down in any observable time. Navy satellite from 1964 (Transit 5B-5 if you are interested) that went rogue after a week of operation is still alive (but kind of crazy, singing senseless, but sometimes very nice songs when exposed to sun, listen them on 136.5MHz LSB modulation when it is over you at daytime), being unattended for nearly 60 years and will not fall down from his 1000km orbit in closest millenias, and will continue to amaze us singing his crazy songs in sunrays.
Only LEO satellites expirience some significant drag and lose speed noticeably.
Also, threat of space garbage to new satellites is miniscule, since it is not even 100 thousand cars on whole Earth, it is 100 thousand cars on whole earth on endless different layers. Probability of occasional unintended collision is very small, at least on current level of space expansion we have.
I feel you misunderstood my point. Each Starlink satellite is massive enough to be used as a weapon itself. A short retrograde burn could send the 250kg mass straight down onto (assumingly) any launchpad-sized area on Earth. We need the Space Nails.
I'm more interested now in the 136.5MHz sun song. What do you hear, an interpretation of solar winds?
A short retrograde burn could send the 250kg mass straight down onto (assumingly) any launchpad-sized area on Earth
That does not work like that. Burn will just slow down 250kg and it begin to lower its orbit. As it reach higher layers of atmosphere, it begin to burn, loosing speed. At the moment it will get to stratosphere it will be already boiling.
To gracefully enter atmosphere you need nearly same amount of fuel that is used to launch that mass to the orbit or heavy heat protection to resist temperatures as spaceships and ballistic missiles have. AFAIK, starlink staellites have none of that on board. They are just aluminium cans with solar panels outside. So, they will just burn high in atmosphere.
You could target anything as a target for starlink satellite, but it is not the right projectile to reach the target. Also, the precision will be not very exciting, since even if burning cloud of aluminium will be able to get close to surface, it will not have engines or flaps to correct trajectory disturbed by winds and starlink satellite aerodynamics.
Even deorbited few tons satellites barely reach surface as single piece, not talking about being precise.
To be able to do the task you talk about, spacecraft have to be designed for that. From what I know about starlink ones, they had not.
IDK, if only starlink staellite outfit is just an external cover, and all their volume inside is reentry module of some kind, but then it is not clear how they are able to do their current internet job.
How come the starlink service is not available across the globe if this satellite map is true? The service areas seem to correlate with ground stations? Could it be orbiting Satellites are fake, and starlink is based off emf towers and land/sea cables just like cellular networks?
Orbital payload is roughly $10,000/lb. If they had 10,000 satellites at 600lb each, that would be $60B. Just to put it there. To say nothing of the cost of the equipment itself. Just a simple sanity says that large equipment doesn't make sense for the sheer number they have achieved.
But it is vulnerable as fuck to the railroad car with nails. All you need to get rid of all that satellites is just launch few dozen tons of nails on the polar orbit at the same altitude and release them with blast. Within few days all that satellites would become a cloud of rubble.
So, that satellites constellation is too vulnerable to be something more than just satellite constellation.
To use it in supposed manner, for all that ultimate surveillance and control things, elites have to be shure that there are no any power left that could launch a few dozen tons of nails into the orbit. Otherwise they could fall into situation when such power could easily blackmail them as it want, since elites tied all their important stuff to that highly vulnerable structure.
And the role of such power could be played by any rogue military commander with access to ballistic missile (it could perfectly launch few tons of nails to starlink orbit) or those who work in space industry with access to launches.
At best Starlink is a beta version of such elites plan. Proof-of-concept, nothing more. Or elites lost last bits of intellect and believe in their own dreams completely.
My concern is this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment
Everything that goes up must come down.
Small debris and unused nails will just burn in high atmosphere without any significant effect on surface. In the worst case you will just have slightly increased meteor activity within few years after wiping out starlink constellation.
Really it is overhyped concern in all. Not everything that goes up will fall down in any observable time. Navy satellite from 1964 (Transit 5B-5 if you are interested) that went rogue after a week of operation is still alive (but kind of crazy, singing senseless, but sometimes very nice songs when exposed to sun, listen them on 136.5MHz LSB modulation when it is over you at daytime), being unattended for nearly 60 years and will not fall down from his 1000km orbit in closest millenias, and will continue to amaze us singing his crazy songs in sunrays.
Only LEO satellites expirience some significant drag and lose speed noticeably.
Also, threat of space garbage to new satellites is miniscule, since it is not even 100 thousand cars on whole Earth, it is 100 thousand cars on whole earth on endless different layers. Probability of occasional unintended collision is very small, at least on current level of space expansion we have.
I feel you misunderstood my point. Each Starlink satellite is massive enough to be used as a weapon itself. A short retrograde burn could send the 250kg mass straight down onto (assumingly) any launchpad-sized area on Earth. We need the Space Nails.
I'm more interested now in the 136.5MHz sun song. What do you hear, an interpretation of solar winds?
That does not work like that. Burn will just slow down 250kg and it begin to lower its orbit. As it reach higher layers of atmosphere, it begin to burn, loosing speed. At the moment it will get to stratosphere it will be already boiling.
To gracefully enter atmosphere you need nearly same amount of fuel that is used to launch that mass to the orbit or heavy heat protection to resist temperatures as spaceships and ballistic missiles have. AFAIK, starlink staellites have none of that on board. They are just aluminium cans with solar panels outside. So, they will just burn high in atmosphere.
You could target anything as a target for starlink satellite, but it is not the right projectile to reach the target. Also, the precision will be not very exciting, since even if burning cloud of aluminium will be able to get close to surface, it will not have engines or flaps to correct trajectory disturbed by winds and starlink satellite aerodynamics.
Even deorbited few tons satellites barely reach surface as single piece, not talking about being precise.
To be able to do the task you talk about, spacecraft have to be designed for that. From what I know about starlink ones, they had not.
IDK, if only starlink staellite outfit is just an external cover, and all their volume inside is reentry module of some kind, but then it is not clear how they are able to do their current internet job.
No these satellites are tiny. About 1 kg each.
I was under the impression they were much bigger. I'm not too worried about a 1kg weight.
https://swarm.space/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Swarm-Satellite.jpg
Tinfoil truth.....Starlink and project bluebeam are related
I noticed a new station in the sky just last week, nearby one that has been up for years. The local paper calls it 'Venus' ROFL
Balloon events are a reveal.
Lol. I was driving the other night, looking at a bright ass star thinking "no fn way that's a star". Then the sob went dark! Gone.
Same here last week.
How come the starlink service is not available across the globe if this satellite map is true? The service areas seem to correlate with ground stations? Could it be orbiting Satellites are fake, and starlink is based off emf towers and land/sea cables just like cellular networks?
https://satellitemap.space/
These satellites are tiny. Each smaller than a typical laptop.
https://swarm.space/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Swarm-Satellite.jpg
SpaceX launches hundreds of these at a time.
Orbital payload is roughly $10,000/lb. If they had 10,000 satellites at 600lb each, that would be $60B. Just to put it there. To say nothing of the cost of the equipment itself. Just a simple sanity says that large equipment doesn't make sense for the sheer number they have achieved.