Starlink isn’t actually that bad in terms of space junk. They’ve been actively deorbiting Gen 1 and partially failed ones. The amount that are uncontrolled junk just passively deorbiting is really small.
Starlink total sats launched: 9896
Total down: 1329 (includes Gen 1 disposal and previous failures)
Total failed, decaying: 16
So they currently have 16 junk Starlinks that should be gone in the next few years.
No starlink is bad. It’s currently deorbiting 1-2 satellites a day, which means half a ton of aluminum and other metals burnt up in the atmosphere.
Current ambition mean they will need to start deorbiting 3-5 satellites per day.
We don’t know yet what ecological impact this will have. But I’m having a hard time accepting such wasteful energy and material consumption.
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:
Their orbit is low, so it doesn’t matter as much if their birds die because they passively deorbit.
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.
Starlink isn’t actually that bad in terms of space junk. They’ve been actively deorbiting Gen 1 and partially failed ones. The amount that are uncontrolled junk just passively deorbiting is really small.
Starlink total sats launched: 9896
Total down: 1329 (includes Gen 1 disposal and previous failures)
Total failed, decaying: 16
So they currently have 16 junk Starlinks that should be gone in the next few years.
Source.
No starlink is bad. It’s currently deorbiting 1-2 satellites a day, which means half a ton of aluminum and other metals burnt up in the atmosphere. Current ambition mean they will need to start deorbiting 3-5 satellites per day.
We don’t know yet what ecological impact this will have. But I’m having a hard time accepting such wasteful energy and material consumption.
deleted by creator
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:
The low orbit point is also made in that Wikipedia page that you linked:
I added the source to my comment above about the deorbit/junk stats.