this post was submitted on 28 May 2025
82 points (100.0% liked)

technology

23830 readers
106 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] WrongOnTheInternet@hexbear.net 19 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

this is beneficial to SpaceX as it means the end of life satellites will re-enter faster, getting them out of the way for their replacements

They can deorbit them at any time though?

[–] TheVelvetGentleman@hexbear.net 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

As far as I'm aware, yes. Maybe the article meant they could use less fuel to do so?

[–] supafuzz@hexbear.net 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

any fuel is... already in space, it's not like they're getting it back if they don't use it

[–] TheVelvetGentleman@hexbear.net 7 points 3 weeks ago

I just looked it up, and yes they deorbit the satellites, but their re-entry orbit takes up to six months. So speeding that up does seem advantageous.

[–] WrongOnTheInternet@hexbear.net 5 points 3 weeks ago

I reread the article, I reckon it's about satellites in general deorbiting faster to avoid a Kessler syndrome scenario

Sean Elvidge at the University of Birmingham, UK, says this effect could benefit satellite operators like SpaceX by removing dead satellites from orbit more quickly that could otherwise pose a danger to other satellites. “It’s speeding up that process,” he says. However, it could limit our ability to operate satellites in orbits below 400 kilometres, known as very low Earth orbit. “It shows that could be challenging,” he says.