If you start shooting down stuff in orbit, it'll invite retaliation, but even without retaliation there's a huge risk of a Kessler syndrome (especially with all the stuff that SpaceX has put into orbit in recent years).

▲

db48x 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No, Kessler syndrome is pretty unlikely in this case. All of the guilty satellites are in Molniya orbits. Debris from destroying them would not greatly effect geosynchronous orbit or the low earth orbits used by Starlink.

▲

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

> especially with all the stuff that SpaceX has put into orbit in recent years

I've heard this repeated a lot but I've never seen anyone do the maths. StarLink satellites are all in very low orbits, so intuitively it seems like most debris from a collision would just end up deorbiting.

	▲	gpm an hour ago \| parent [-]
		90% of starlink satellites are >400km in altitude. They aren't in very low earth orbits where that intuition even might be correct. They're above the space station. I've definitely seen math done - though I'd have to dig it up again. I think in FAA filings.

▲

Aerroon 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I've thought about this before - do you actually need to "shoot it down" (make it explode)? What if you just nudge it a little and either make it spin or change its orbit? If your missile can reach the satellite then these seem like things that should be possible, no?

▲

Cthulhu_ 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Depends, if you nudge it only a little, its own onboard stabilizers / thrusters should be able to correct it. It'd have to be more than its own systems can correct for.

	▲	speed_spread 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Nudge it long enough to deplete it's fuel reserves? Or just wrap the emitting antenna in tin foil...