this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2025
82 points (98.8% liked)

Space

1830 readers
97 users here now

A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  2. Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
  3. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics

Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instance’s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.


Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography


Other Cool Links


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] burble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 days ago

I understand Kessler Syndrome and am not saying that it isn't possible. I just think Starlink is the wrong constellation to be mad about. There are two points I'm trying to make here about Starlink:

  1. Their orbit is low, so it doesn't matter as much if their birds die because they passively deorbit.
  2. SpaceX has been a good steward of their orbits and don't have much dead junk up there.

The low orbit point is also made in that Wikipedia page that you linked:

Starlink satellites are launched at a lower altitude of 550 km ... and failed satellites or debris are thus expected to deorbit within five years even without propulsion, due to atmospheric drag.

I added the source to my comment above about the deorbit/junk stats.