Elon Musk’s Starlink constellation has FCC approval to include up to 12,000 satellites in low-earth orbit to provide low-latency gigabit broadband internet virtually everywhere on Earth. Musk plans 30,000 more. But this massive increase of orbiting objects has some experts worried about a catastrophic collision cascade that effectively shuts off space exploration forever. It could also threaten astronauts aboard the ISS, our GPS system, and military surveillance capabilities…not to mention the Gravity of the risk to Sandra Bullock and George Clooney.
Watch the epic series Apollo 11: What We Saw with Bill Whittle
Bill Whittle Now with Scott Ott is a production of our Members, and you can join us right now.
Listen to the Audio Version
Bill Whittle Network · Starlink: High Speed Internet for All vs. Collision Cascade that Shuts Off Space Forever
45 replies on “Starlink: High Speed Internet for All vs. Collision Cascade that Shuts Off Space Forever”
Bill, it is my understanding that StarLink satellites are launched into VERY low orbit, and when they reach the end of their design life, they will de-orbit and burn up in the atmosphere. Failing that, within 1-5 years their orbits will decay anyhow. So, in the event of a cascade collision, it seems to me we would be locked from space for just a few years. Am I miss something here? Frankly, I am far more concerned with the stuff slightly higher up where we already have a metric crapload of debris hanging around for a LONG time before the orbits finally decay.
I take umbrage that decreased visibility of natural constellations in favor of Skylink’s whirling balls of fire is merely “annoying”. We already have to venture out into the vast desert even to view the Milky Way. My exchange student from Bangkok had never seen the stars–ever–until we brought her with us to Arizona. She took home a deep interest in astronomy, space, and rocketry.
While I appreciate the vision of universal internet, I miss the unobstructed view of Lyra, Draco, and the gang as the line of Skylink lights swirls past hour after hour.
I think Bill was thinking more of telescope observations, and highly precise ones at that.
With the majority of the satellites not yet in orbit, the lack of visibility I think is due to light pollution from cities and anything and everything being open 24×7 or at least lit. I’m 3 miles from a town of 6000 people and it isn’t an easy thing to see some things at night, though on a good clear night the stars are visible over the corn or soybeans, depending on what the neighbor planted. Closer to town or one of the other 14-20k people towns nearby, no such luck. They are even visible on the horizon and the glow is visible on low cloud banks.
I was involved in a previous project like starlink called server sky.
http://server-sky.com/ Its not just relay satellites but orbiting computers with memory and processing power.
All satellites put into orbit have de-orbiting technology built in so when they become obsolete a command can be sent to fire the little ion engine and send them into the upper atmosphere to burn up. This has been done for the past 2 or 3 years. There is also a plan to harvest space junk, mill it into dust and add glue to build girders, shielding bricks and other structures. I’m one of the people advocating the latter solution. Space junk is a resource.
Thanks for the information truly fascinating!
I was looking forward to Starlink Internet service before Bill’s explanation that this will create a never-ending and constant worldwide rain of metallic death rocks.
“The Cascade” is another way of saying Kessler Syndrome. The risk isn’t 0, but it’s pretty close to 0 in the case of Starlink and may even may be fixed due to Starlink, which I’ll get into later. For reference, each Starlink sat is roughly 3m x 1.5m and weighs somewhere in the neighborhood of 600 pounds.
First it must be noted that this is not 30,000 satellites at one orbital altitude. It is planned on being put up in shells of various amounts at various altitudes. As of currently known information, SpaceX is planning Phase 1 to have Shells 1-5 at altitudes ranging from 540 to 570 km. Phase 2 will be many different shells from 330 to 580 km. All of these satellites are at an altitude where atmospheric drag will passively deorbit them within a few months to a few years should they lose communication with them for any reason. Version 0.9 Starlink sats have already began coming back down. All Satellites have a 5 year lifespan, will be deorbited under control, and are 100% demisable (meaning they are entirely destroyed during entry). All of these satellites are also equipped with Hall Effect thrusters using Krypton which means they can alter their orbit individually based on detection of any risk with tracked objects.
So really what we’re talking about here is various shells of maybe 1500-5000 satellites orbiting Earth with each shell having an orbit that never intersects with any of the other shells. If you can envision spreading 1500-5000 objects 10 feet by 10 feet over a sphere larger than the Earth and setting them in motion precisely the way you want them to go, the chances of collision are pretty small.
Now if you’re doing the math from Scott saying they are launching on average 60 per month, with a total of 15000 – 30000, with a 5 year lifespan, something isn’t adding up. You would be correct. In steps SpaceX’s next generation launch vehicle which they are currently building in South Texas at Boca Chica. This mammoth stainless steel giant which will be taller than the Saturn 5 with OVER 2 TIMES THE THRUST is being designed with the goal of being 100% reusable. Meaning the ship in orbit will deorbit, fall through the air like a skydiver, then right itself and land on pillars of fire at which point it will be reloaded, restacked, refueled, and immediately reflown with the only cost being the fuel.
This ship is supposed to be able to carry 400 Starlink sats on every single launch. In other words, in order for this constellation as they envision to be a reality, for them to even be able to finish it before the lifetime of the sats they launched first is up, it requires their next generation ship to be fully operational and flying very frequently. When you can fly a singlular ship this size many times per day with your primary cost being CH4 and O2, this enables what Bill was talking about which is the capability to go into space and deorbit space junk. So ironically, the constellation which makes people feel concern for Kessler Syndrome may in fact largely fund the first operational capability of humanity to prevent Kessler Syndrome.
That’s very interesting, thank you for taking the time to point these things out to us. I appreciate the effort and your writing is excellent also.
Excellent analysis, thank you.
Best line, though, is this: Meaning the ship in orbit will deorbit, fall through the air like a skydiver, then right itself and land on pillars of fire
I cannot wait to see that! Watching the boosters return to their floating pads was incredible, a 10 of 10. This will go to 11.
Starlink – really. Why not cut through it and just call it Skynet?
Then all we have to fear is Skynet becoming sentient and deciding it doesn’t need we bothersome humans. Space junk would then be the least of our worries.
Fortunately, I am old enough that I won’t have to experience that fateful day. I won’t say so much for you younger folk.
This was posted in jest. They should have come up with something that could not be tangentially tied to a movie trilogy.
Hahaha! My laptop has already made it clear that I am not worth obeying.
So … The answer to “the cascade” is that anyone who figures out a way to clean up near-Earth space will become fabulously wealthy. Unless a government agency beats them to it of course …
DARPA has two schemes they’re considering, EDDE and GOLD. The Russians at Energia have another scheme. I’m thinking that though this space junk thing is a problem, it’s not something that cannot be overcome. It’s more a matter of what it’s going to cost as far as I can see.
My vote is for convex space lenses or concave mirrors that operate under solar power to spin gyros for orientation and targeting and focus sunlight via a variable focal point which vaporizes the small bits and can be used to generate counter-orbital thrust to slow down larger chunks and de-orbit them. These would have the side benefit of being significant anti-exoatmospheric launch defenses. But that’s just my two cents …
So let’s turn Elon Musk loose on the problem and let him launch his internet satellites with the proviso he comes up with a way to clean up his and the rest of the mess up there while he’s at it.
Clean up near Earth space – isn’t that what Blofeld and Spectre were trying to do in “You only live twice” 😉
I believe you are correct, sir!
Geostationary orbit is 22,236 miles.
And communication latency is 240ms one way, making it just under 1/2 second (480ms) round trip.
Can anyone say “Salvage 1”?
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078681/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_34
Who remembers this series?
Loved that show
Ah, yes! Andy Griffiths, post Sheriff, pre-Matlock, doing a good turn as an action hero! Great show.
And Bruce Boxleitner! Bonus!
Edit: Not Bruce. My mistake…
Following up on Lionell’s comment and several other thoughts:
The only episode of the cartoon “Colonel Bleep” I remember clearly has the plot of him tracking and mapping all the earth’s satellites to prevent catastrophe. (Sadly, it’s one of the lost episodes). To solve this problem, all we need are an alien, a caveman, and a puppet.
Oh, we have them already: Ilhan Omar, Andrew Cuomo, and Joe Biden!
Great answer!
“There goes the neighborhood,” says the man in the middle of rural Montana.
Has anyone thought of a space vacuum cleaner?
Well, yes! That idea sucks. 😉
Er … maybe not, since the necessary pressure differential between space and the vacuum bag will be negligible.
A long time ago I read somewhere that if take the most perfect vacuum we can create into space and open it, the air will rush out of the vacuum we can create.
Yep. A vacuum in space actually blows!
Space Balls!
I have been living in the decentralized internet connected technological civilization for 25 years. I have developed a complex software product and distribute it to customers over the internet. Cell phone and internet contact nation wide with the other members of our transcontinental corporation is a frequent occurrence. I even remotely connect to my customers’ computers and provide remote assistance and training. As the bit rate of my internet connection goes up, every remote task becomes easier and more richly accomplished.
Most of that 25 years was spent in rural LA county and small town Santa Barbra County California. For personal and medical reasons, I moved to a Chicago suburb some 3 years ago. At 83, with some significant medical issues, I need to be near high quality medical facilities. However, the transcendental corporation functions as before. I haven’t physically been in the presence of the other people in the corporation nor any of its customers for a very long time. The last time I flew somewhere for any reason was over 15 years ago. I no longer use planes, trains, busses, or public transportation for any reason. I have gone on a few automobile trips to visit extended family.
It can be made to work. However, it takes an enormous amount of discipline and trust to make it so. I wouldn’t have it any other way. As far as I am concerned, the large metropolitan areas can go the way of Detroit. It wouldn’t bother me a bit.
Lionel – as you have seen over your career, and this “pandemic” has shown; the tools we have to connect verbally and visually with each other keep improving. I am in Bus Dev for a medium sized multi-national. Generally I should travel to client factories multiple times per year as well as engineering meetings the new building they completed 18 months ago.
We are all pretty sure that those face to face meetings are a thing of the past.
Why go through the time and expense to fly to China when we can have a video call at a reasonably convenient time. Even if it is 9pm my time, that is better than a 30 hour round trip and a week gone from other duties.
We have also proved that many of us can do our jobs productively without someone looking over our shoulder.
Surprisingly, Microsoft has provided an extremely useful tool for “free” that strongly supports remote technical support. It’s called Remote Assist. While it lacks a built in file transfer mechanism, it does enable me to login to a remote system and operate it as if I were in front of it.
Currently, the only “cost” is you have to use a Microsoft Account and have a remote operator available to give permission for the login. Voice contact is by phone. The lack of a file transfer mechanism is easily worked around.
It is a remarkably powerful “free” tool for Windows 10 users.
Interesting. I’m going to check it out. Thanks for your comment!
Please don’t. What Lionell is talking about is Quick Assist, the Windows 10 version of Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) that allows someone to ask for help from a trusted person on a computer elsewhere on the internet.
You have to turn it on to use it and there’s a very good reason why Windows 10 does not ship with it activated. RDP is part of Windows Terminal Services and that is a system meant to use a Windows machine as a thin client on a server inside a corporate firewall perimeter. It’s been around since XP and it’s not a “new” thing by any stretch of the imagination.
It’s got some serious vulnerabilities and is a prime target for exploration.by black hats. It’s easy to click the wrong box and misconfigure it. It’s easy to trigger and being as most people don’t know to change the default port from TCP/UDP 3389 once your machine is configured to use RDP it’s just sitting there waiting for a hacker to come in over that port. That is a port that the black hats always use in their port scanning software. UPnP on routers makes that all the more likely to become a vulnerability.
There are better tools for that. Look up “TeamViewer”, it’s free for non-commercial home use and it’s very secure. It was designed to do what you want it to and it’s not an afterthought by Microsoft like Quick Assist. You can chat via text or speak and use video while connected also. It has a “request assistance” feature too. It’s just an overall much better solution.
Almost all the dedicated remote desktop offerings are better than Quick Assist and almost all of them are free to home users not operating in a commercial environment. TeamViewer just happens to be the easiest to set up without opening up your system to unwanted intrusions and it’s very easy to find and install.
TeamViewer is also VERY expensive for use in an enterprise environment so if that’s what you need let me know and I’ll make a couple of other suggestions.
Thanks for your reply. I’ll forget about it!
You’re welcome. Look into TeamViewer. Like I said, It’s free, too. Or if you use Google Chrome a lot, there’s a free remote and help system that they offer too. It’s called “Google Chrome Desktop” and it’s also free.
That also strikes me as potentially dangerous for less tech savvy people. I am thinking of my late mother who lived on her PC and didn’t want to bother me with small issues. She contracted with a service and got spoofed by caller who said there was a problem with her anti-virus software and could he check a couple things. It was not her service and had I not been there she would have let her log into her machine.
You wouldn’t expect to drive an exotic race car on a track without extensive training. Training that is way beyond starting the car, pressing down on the gas peddle, and steering onto the track .
So also running a browser on the internet requires extensive training of how to drive it through the internet safely. A browser looks as easy to use as a simple golf cart but in reality it is more like an exotic race car.
Your mother was fortunate to have you save the day and prevent an almost fatal crash. The question is why did you allow your mother on the internet without training her on the basics of safe computing?
I actually didn’t. I had asked her to call me with all issues and she generally knew never to allow someone she didn’t call any info. She decided that she was bothering me too much and contracted with some company for simple troubleshooting. As she got older and her mental faculties slipped, I had to take on more tasks; bill paying and such. She was fiercely independent to the last. As we are seeing with my wife’s parents, they don’t always tell us everything. I hope you have a plan laid out with you children, as they may not see it happening.
I started with computers in 1965. Way before the personal computer internet connected universe. Both my parents had passed before computers were common. So I could not have taught them safe computing if I had wanted to.
When my daughter gets in trouble with her computer, she brings it to me and says “Dad, make it work”. My grandson builds his own computers.
I suggest it will be quite a while before I can’t be trusted with my computer. I will more than likely be dead before that happens.
After all, I am 83 years old and and still provide technical support for those I care for: family and customers. It helps that I have an advanced science degree and an IQ in the top 0.1%. I could lose 30 points of IQ and still be more competent than your average person.
You did exactly the right thing. I always give my clients or friends and family a little talk about “The Fire Department Rule”. That rule states that if it occurs to you that you might have to call the Fire Department, you should already be dialing the phone. If it occurs to you (the people I help, I’m semi-retired and have kept a few clients that would have a hard time with another IT guy) that you might need to call me, you should already be dialing. Don’t try to figure it out because you’ll likely as not make it worse, don’t shut off the machine, stop right there and pick up the phone. That policy saves us all quite a bit of grief.
Sadly when it comes to old people they tend not to listen. As you point out, they don’t want to be a burden. I know this syndrome well, I’m an old people too … now.
It is very dangerous for all the reasons I explained to Barbara Matz above … and a few more. There are better ways for a home user to get better functionality than using a Microsoft Windows Terminal Services program kludged together as an afterthought. Seriously, no one who is familiar with this stuff uses MS Quick Assist. I was a sysadmin and IT networking and security specialist for years, I don’t know a single sysadmin that uses Quick Assist for support roles. Even thought it’s free and built into every Windows workstation on their network(s). I don’t even have it turned on on my Windows machines and I’m always careful to make sure it’s off on client, family and friends computers when I configure them.
Don’t take my word for it, do a search on “RDP is dangerous” with your favorite search engine. Read a few of the articles that pop up and judge for yourself.
You might ask “Wait, we’re talking about Quick Assist, what’s this RDP stuff?”
Quick Assist is a feature of RDP, Remote Desktop Protocol, which is part of Windows Terminal Services, which is foundational to RDP. It was originally developed for thin clients to connect to a “desktop” hosted by a thin client server. It wasn’t meant as a remote assistance or remote control tool and has been adapted for that. Microsoft, for marketing purposes, often tries to provide functionality that is better gained with other tools, so they re-write some code and voila! you have a functionality that will fulfill a bare minimum requirement and if you want more go get the tool for it. .In the adaptation process, like so many things from Microsoft, corners were cut and vulnerabilities were overlooked or ignored. (Windows Millennium Edition was released to the public with over 50,000 known issues. The good news is only 20,000 of them were mission critical or capable of catastrophic compromise and/or failure.)
I’m not slagging on Microsoft, without Microsoft we would be no where near the state of the art we have today in the computing world. I’m just being realistic about their shortcomings of which there are many. The REASON for those shortcomings is valid. Microsoft could produce a very secure, significantly safe Operating System. It would cost over $20,000.00 a copy and no one would buy it. There are systems like that and that’s what they cost and even then they can have vulnerabilities. Ask the Iranians about what Stuxnet did to their SCADA and PLC systems. Stuxnet had a Windows vector but it attacked high end control systems outside of Windows.
I’m not slagging on Lionell either and I could say a lot more. If you want to know more, feel free to ask. I.E. there are commercial applications of RDP like QuickBooks Online that use a very correctly configured and safe RDP connection to launch a thin client emulation to a QuickBooks server. It’s not that RDP is of itself wholly bad, it’s that it’s dangerous if you don’t know what you’re doing and if you don’t know how and why it can be dangerous you should not be messing with it. That’s why Microsoft does not ship Windows OS’s with Quick Assist or RDP activated even though some flavor of Quick Assist has been available since Windows XP.