For the predictable reasons, the article overemphasizes "number of satellites" and under-emphasizes "height of satellites" and "inclination of satellites."

The CTC-1 constellation proposes to be at 510 km altitude and 97.4 degrees inclination[0], which is already a heavily-populated orbit[1] due to being in a Sun-synchronous orbit. Since the collision risk scales as the object density squared, this is an especially foolhardy decision from the perspective of space debris and space sustainability.

Remember that most of the satellite collisions occur in a "halo" around the North and South poles where the SSO orbits all pile up. Avoiding these orbital slots (and in fact, removing defunct objects from these valuable orbits) is the best thing we could do for Kessler syndrome. China is doing literally the exact opposite.

It also doesn't help that China just abandons their upper stages in orbit, rather than doing proper deorbit burns.[2] Since each Chinese rocket also can only launch a handful of satellites (vs almost 50 per SpaceX launch), the number of abandoned debris upper stages is truly massive, and again they're all being carelessly discarded in pretty much the worst possible orbit.

[0] https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;...

[1] https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44021.0

[2] https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/10/everyone-but-china-has...

▲

maxglute 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>perspective of space debris and space sustainability

PRC are being careless in 800km orbit, which is actually much worse, but historically that's where US / USSR abandoned debris, PRC still small %, either way it's just stopgap for reusables, they obviously can't hit 200k mega constellation without reusable tempo. In meantime no point reengineering end of life vehicles since reusable replacement likely going to be done by then, especially at risk of missing delivery/capability to keep ITU filings, or worse, lose them to competitors (US).

Lets be real, space is being soft weaponized post SpaceX/Starshield, space debris/sustainability can wait, launch is realpolitik now. Much more important to be competitive = reserving prime orbits ITU has available in limited quantities, first file first serve. Starlink's done their own orbit squatting, PRC simply making sure strategic LEO isn't monopolized by US mega constellations.

▲

perihelions 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is a misidentification:

> "The CTC-1 constellation proposes to be at 510 km altitude and 97.4 degrees inclination[0]"

That's an unrelated "CTC-1"; your reference [0] describes American CubeSats. This isn't the Chinese megaconstellation that was just announced; it's a name collision.

The CTC-1 in your link is identified as a trio of CubeSats assigned to the SpaceX rideshare mission Transporter 15. Cross-referencing, SpaceX does show of trio of small satellites by the name "CTC-1" (a,b,c) launched on Transporter 15, on Nov. 28, 2025,

https://www.spacex.com/launches/transporter-15 ("Transporter-15 Mission")

▲

beepbooptheory 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why choose to put them on a heavily populated orbit? Is it cheaper or something?

	▲	remarkEon 6 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It’s possible this is less about comms or cost, and more about occupying an orbit with high utility. I think of it as just an extension of PRC’s “rape the oceans” policy.
	▲	FloorEgg 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		It has a really good balance of engineering constraints. High enough that atmospheric drag doesn't require constant propulsion to maintain orbit. Low enough to get some radiation shielding. Lower orbits better for communication latency and imaging resolution. Also sun-synchronous orbits are in this zone. Good balance for coverage vs number of satellites. There are a lot of strategic reasons why this altitude is ideal.
	▲	wmf 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Sun-synchronous orbits are great for spy satellites. One might wonder if this is a dual-use constellation. Of course the US is doing something similar with Starshield.
	▲	notahacker 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		They're internet broadband satellites, they want low latency connectivity, as does SpaceX and everybody else launching them there. It does also cost more to reach higher orbits, and more to stay in much lower orbits for any length of time due to propellant requirements.