Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Satellites Equipped With a Tether Would be Able to De-Orbit Themselves at the end of

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    27,792

    Satellites Equipped With a Tether Would be Able to De-Orbit Themselves at the end of

    A new technology that allows satellites to de-orbit themselves at the end of their lives could help mitigate the problem of space debris.
    The post Satellites Equipped With a Tether Would be Able to De-Orbit Themselves at the end of Their Life appeared first on Universe Today.


    More...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,128
    If this is feasible, why not attached it with robot satellites to clear the dead one out of the sky, perhaps the robots could carry many attachable reels and one for itself once it runs out of fuel/reels.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    If this is feasible, why not attached it with robot satellites to clear the dead one out of the sky, perhaps the robots could carry many attachable reels and one for itself once it runs out of fuel/reels.
    They have attempted to design "housekeeping" satellites. The challenges of matching speeds with and docking with an orbiting sat are prohibitive for any economically practical solution.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Fraser View Post
    A new technology that allows satellites to de-orbit themselves at the end of their lives could help mitigate the problem of space debris.
    The post Satellites Equipped With a Tether Would be Able to De-Orbit Themselves at the end of Their Life appeared first on Universe Today.
    I'd be interested in the mass factor. Mass allowance comes at a premium for any sat payload. Missions would have to give something up for this feature (though I'd say it's justified).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveC426913 View Post
    They have attempted to design "housekeeping" satellites. The challenges of matching speeds with and docking with an orbiting sat are prohibitive for any economically practical solution.
    Who is they? When was this attempted, how many failures?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    Who is they? When was this attempted, how many failures?
    "...design..." As in: it doesn't get off the drawing board.
    The problems become clear from the get-go: it would take a prohibitive amount of fuel to move between multiple satellites.


    Who the actual vendors are, I couldn't say.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveC426913 View Post
    "...design..." As in: it doesn't get off the drawing board.
    The problems become clear from the get-go: it would take a prohibitive amount of fuel to move between multiple satellites.


    Who the actual vendors are, I couldn't say.
    So you are speculating, then. Fair enough. It may/may not take a prohibitive amount, that depends on the orbits.
    You may be correct no design work has been undertaken, but that clearly is speculation on your part.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    3,153
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveC426913 View Post
    They have attempted to design "housekeeping" satellites. The challenges of matching speeds with and docking with an orbiting sat are prohibitive for any economically practical solution.
    This might be happening in 2021, if you meant "on-orbit servicing" when you said "housekeeping".

    https://phys.org/news/2018-11-space-...n-orbit_1.html

    Existing thread in this CQ forum on this topic: https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthr...ft-It-s-coming
    There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.
    Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi (1883)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    So you are speculating, then. Fair enough.
    No. I'm recounting what I've read. Though I have no source I can provide.


    I didn't say 'no design work has been undertaken', I said designs have been attempted (there would be no reason to make a prototype for testing, since the fuel / delta V problem comes to light in any design).
    Last edited by DaveC426913; 2019-Jun-17 at 08:26 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveC426913 View Post
    No. I'm recounting what I've read. Though I have no source I can provide.


    I didn't say 'no design work has been undertaken', I said designs have been attempted (there would be no reason to make a prototype for testing, since the fuel / delta V problem comes to light in any design.
    Until you provide us with documentation there is no evidence, sorry. In your favor, fuel is a concern in any design/attempt.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    3,153
    Let me try one more time:

    https://sspd.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/NA...eport_0511.pdf
    NASA: On-Orbit Satellite Servicing Study Project Report, October 2010

    http://interactive.satellitetoday.co...icing-is-here/
    The Time For On-Orbit Satellite Servicing is Here
    Satellite servicing is finally becoming a reality thanks to favorable economics for service providers, which is mainly due to the future possibilities that this kind of work opens up.

    https://www.geospatialworld.net/arti...-challenges-2/
    On-orbit satellite servicing: Process, Benefits and Challenges
    By Mahashreveta Choudhary - 07/27/2018

    https://www.darpa.mil/program/roboti...ous-satellites
    Robotic Servicing of Geosynchronous Satellites (RSGS)
    Mr. Joseph Parrish

    http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3653/1
    Rethinking satellite servicing
    by Jeff Foust - Monday, February 4, 2019
    There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.
    Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi (1883)

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    Until you provide us with documentation there is no evidence, sorry. In your favor, fuel is a concern in any design/attempt.
    You're welcome to research this to your heart's content.

    I did not profess to have documentation, nor did I state any absolutes that could be asserted to be "wrong". I simply stated that is has been looked at and found problematic.

    This is not a debate. I think you are tilting at windmills here.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    3,153
    Kinda smiling here, as I can guess who has me on their ignore lists. I deserve it, but it is funny.
    There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.
    Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi (1883)

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    Kinda smiling here, as I can guess who has me on their ignore lists. I deserve it, but it is funny.
    I'll have a look at your references.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    This might be happening in 2021, if you meant "on-orbit servicing" when you said "housekeeping".

    https://phys.org/news/2018-11-space-...n-orbit_1.html
    OK, this is talking about maintaining a set of working sats in stable and similar orbits (and which have an ongoing dollar value, justifying ongoing maintenance).

    It's a different kettle of fish than trying to target multiple pieces of junk - that could be in unique orbits at unique velocities and inclinations, simply - as @bknight said:

    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    ... to clear the dead one out of the sky...
    Last edited by DaveC426913; 2019-Jun-17 at 08:24 PM.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    3,153
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveC426913 View Post
    OK, this is talking about maintaining a set of working sats in stable and similar orbits (and which have an ongoing dollar value).

    It's a different kettle of fish than trying to target multiple pieces of junk - that could be in unique orbits at unique velocities and inclinations, simply - as bk said "to clear the dead one out of the sky".
    My fault. I assumed "housekeeping" meant "servicing".
    There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.
    Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi (1883)

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger E. Moore View Post
    My fault. I assumed "housekeeping" meant "servicing".
    No. It's cool. It's still part of the broader picture.

    I was specifically addressing bk's spin-off idea that it could be feasible to do it for junk-clearing.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    3,153
    This news might be of interest. The ESA is planning to deorbit a very large satellite about 2023.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E.Deorbit
    There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.
    Mark Twain, Life on the Mississippi (1883)

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,411
    Envisat is a monster. The Skylab of Earth monitoring sats.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •