Orbital Debris A Real Risk

[NeoMorph]

Looks like the Kerbals aren't the only ones hating orbital debris...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22299403

[The Flying Ham]

Yeah there's some odd stuff up there as well.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/02/spacestuff/

Launch hindered due to spatula collision.

[Splode]

We're lucky we don't have to deal with fragments and dust!

[Deadpangod3]

We need to bring this debris down... One way or another, we've polluted outer space, its bad enough here on earth, if an extra terrestrial civilization were to visit earth and was hit by a piece of debris, they'd probably think its an act of war, and we would be doomed, plus future generations will have to deal with it sooner or later, the least we can do is to reduce it as much as possible for them when they expand to other planets

[ROFLCopter64bit]

Now we just need an orbital cannon...

[Psycho0124]

An orbital laser would probably do it. You wouldn't even need to vaporize the objects entirely. Just zap the side facing the objects pro-grade. As some of the material vaporizes, it produces a little thrust and pushes the object down into lower (hopefully more quickly decaying) orbit.

[-Gamah]

I don't see this being an issue... even if the 30,000 objects are all 10 cubic meters in volume, odds for colissions are still astronomically low. A colission is only likely to send both objects into newer, less populated and certainly likely less-threatening trajectories. Also pretty sure the more important satellites are tracked fairly accurately and collisions are predicted and averted with on board maneuvering.

[LaydeeDem]

I seem to have the same issue myself:

[Kamsko]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J19VZ9DwUos

This seems to be an appropriate place to post this.

[dharak1]

I always figured we should develop a swarm of robots to make a station out of debris. Kind of like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvN9Ri1GmuY . it could cut the delta V cost to make one because they could just rendezvous with large debris bring it to the construction site and weld it or however they would have to make it. Then when its done just bring up some air tanks and fill the shell of a station.

[ROFLCopter64bit]

I seem to have the same issue myself:

-snip-

You think that's a problem?

[CalculusWarrior]

I don't see this being an issue... even if the 30,000 objects are all 10 cubic meters in volume, odds for colissions are still astronomically low. A colission is only likely to send both objects into newer, less populated and certainly likely less-threatening trajectories. Also pretty sure the more important satellites are tracked fairly accurately and collisions are predicted and averted with on board maneuvering.

The problem is not that there are a large number of spent boosters and nonfunctional spacecraft, etc, but that there are insane amounts of tiny bits of debris.

For example, the following is a picture of the Space Shuttle window after it was struck by a piece of debris.

The size of the debris that hit? A tiny fleck of paint.

In space it's not the size of the debris that matters so much, it's the velocity that gets you!

[metaphor]

These are only the objects over 10 cm in size, of which there are about 30,000.

There are also about 500,000 objects over 1 cm in size, most of which are untracked, and more than 100,000,000 objects of less than 1 cm in size.

The highest collision risk is between a small object and a large object, which would vaporize the small one and significantly damage the large one.

When you're going around the Earth at high speeds, even a 1cm object is likely going several kilometers per second relative to you, and the energy imparted by that object to your satellite or space station is orders of magnitude higher than the energy of a speeding bullet.

Because space is big, the chance of any particular spacecraft being the victim of a collision is pretty small, but the chance of a collision happening is very large, on the order of one big collision every few years. And every collision generates debris which has a chance of causing further impacts.

[ROFLCopter64bit]

And every collision generates debris which has a chance of causing further impacts.

Cause and effect is one mean law.

[NeoMorph]

I don't see this being an issue... even if the 30,000 objects are all 10 cubic meters in volume, odds for colissions are still astronomically low. A colission is only likely to send both objects into newer, less populated and certainly likely less-threatening trajectories. Also pretty sure the more important satellites are tracked fairly accurately and collisions are predicted and averted with on board maneuvering.

Hmmm Not an issue huh? ->>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_satellite_collision

One collision created over 1000 extra debris bits. Just one of those hitting an astronauts suit will kill him outright. Just one of those hitting a satellite will destroy many billions of pounds/dollars/whatever. What the scientists are really worrying about is something called Kessler Syndrome.

[NeoMorph]

In space it's not the size of the debris that matters so much, it's the velocity that gets you!

Hell yeah... The kinetic energy in that paint chip must have been huge. When it hits the shuttle window it transfers that kinetic energy into the window via conservation of energy. It's why the "Rods From God" can create explosions similar to a nuke yet are only comprised of a big chunk of metal dropped from orbit. It turns that kinetic energy into high energy explosions. They call those chunks of metal "crowbars" but they are the size of telephone poles. Now if you imagine that a paint chip did that to the shuttle, just imagine what the mass of a telephone pole dropping from orbit will be.

So that "Rods From God" device (also known as Project Thor) is a DESIGNED weapon. Now take a heavy satellite that hits another satellite. It's essentially one of the biggest bullets or shells out there. It doesn't just nudge the other satellite... it pretty much goes BOOOM. Bits fly off in all directions adding to the debris cloud. I think people just don't realise how much energy is contained in those orbiting hunks of metal.

Eventually the cascade event will mean that stuff we send up is going to get shot down by our past rockets. Be it a rivet, a paint fleck or even a tiny particle of metal, too small to see. Those items will mean you will need to armour up your craft. Heh, Kevlar on a spacecraft hull.

[rosenkranz]

Astronomically low or not, it's possible. I had 20 ships in orbit at one time and on one launch had an unintentional rendezvous with another ship and missed it by less than 1500m.

[azazel1024]

I don't see this being an issue... even if the 30,000 objects are all 10 cubic meters in volume, odds for colissions are still astronomically low. A colission is only likely to send both objects into newer, less populated and certainly likely less-threatening trajectories. Also pretty sure the more important satellites are tracked fairly accurately and collisions are predicted and averted with on board maneuvering.

Ya don't, do you?

Cause orbital collisions have occured several times, including disabling/destroying satellites in the past. Part of the issue is that the orbits choosen all tend to be in roughly the same spots for reasons of Earth coverage. So it isn't simply 30,000 objects orbiting in 30,000 different orbits. It is more like 30,000 objects orbiting in 500 orbits, of which dozens of those intersect/cross within dozens to hunderds of meters of each other...and a little orbital decay nudging, or solar radiation push and an orbit crosses and disaster.

I actually had an orbital collision in KSP and I have debris set to non-permemnant. I accidently had a booster I dettached strike a satellite about a minute after seperation. Since the satellite was going a lot faster, both blew up (satellite in 200km orbit, booster had an AP of 230km and a PE of 10km).

[Tauge]

There are organizations and groups out there that are trying to do things about this, but international law is making it hard. Only the launching entity is allowed to touch orbital objects. Then there is the problems of accidents, unexpected satellite failures, less mature launch entites that don't take the care to make sure everything reenters like the more mature launch entites are now doing, etc. It is a bit of a wild west up there and even though some take care...accidents happen. Look up Kessler Syndrome and Envisat if you want to get nervous. Or the 2009 Iridium/Kosmos collision or China's ill-advised 2007 anti-sat missile test. The difference between theirs and the US test is that the sat the US tested on was going to reenter in a short time...the Chinese one...not so much.

Edited April 26, 2013 by Tauge

[Blackstar]

Astronomically low or not, it's possible. I had 20 ships in orbit at one time and on one launch had an unintentional rendezvous with another ship and missed it by less than 1500m.

It's not even what I'd call astronomical. Space is vast, yes, but once gravity is in the picture you're limited to orbital tracks which significantly reduces the possible places an object can 'park' in orbit. Any object at a given altitude has a chance of eventually colliding with another object that crosses the same altitude unless their inclination and eccentricity is identical. Once you have hundreds of thousands or even millions of objects, then the time required for such a collision to be likely drops dramatically.

I think people just don't realise how much energy is contained in those orbiting hunks of metal.

That's true. One way I like to think about it is to remember how much rocket fuel had to be burned in order to get something to orbital velocities. Now that's nowhere near 100% efficient, but a chunk of that fuel got turned into kinetic energy, just waiting to be released when it hits something that's not going as fast (or in the same direction).

[azazel1024]

Hell yeah... The kinetic energy in that paint chip must have been huge. When it hits the shuttle window it transfers that kinetic energy into the window via conservation of energy. It's why the "Rods From God" can create explosions similar to a nuke yet are only comprised of a big chunk of metal dropped from orbit. It turns that kinetic energy into high energy explosions. They call those chunks of metal "crowbars" but they are the size of telephone poles. Now if you imagine that a paint chip did that to the shuttle, just imagine what the mass of a telephone pole dropping from orbit will be.

So that "Rods From God" device (also known as Project Thor) is a DESIGNED weapon. Now take a heavy satellite that hits another satellite. It's essentially one of the biggest bullets or shells out there. It doesn't just nudge the other satellite... it pretty much goes BOOOM. Bits fly off in all directions adding to the debris cloud. I think people just don't realise how much energy is contained in those orbiting hunks of metal.

Eventually the cascade event will mean that stuff we send up is going to get shot down by our past rockets. Be it a rivet, a paint fleck or even a tiny particle of metal, too small to see. Those items will mean you will need to armour up your craft. Heh, Kevlar on a spacecraft hull.

It is impossible to armor a ship sufficient to stop anything but a micrometeriote sized impact. So, yeah, you can stop things like paint flecks, slivers, etc, maybe even a bolt if sufficiently designed. It will NOT stop a space craft on space craft collision, nor with any kind of even moderate sized debris (maybe something under 1cm).

The ISS actually has something like this. It is a thin metal shield placed some distance from the actual hull (a few cm? a meter? Not sure actual distance).

To stop something the size and weight of a human fist moving at orbital velocities would likely take something stronger than the glacis plate of an M1A1 Abrams tank. A seperate stand off shield will cause most debris to vaporize due to the collision velocities involved and then you need your hull or secondard armor to be sufficiently strong to absorb the micro-debris and/or gas/plasma cloud generated by the collision.

Even with a stand off shield a super thick hull is not likely to stop even small debris (micro sized sure).

This ignores completely the issues with trying to loft satellites or space stations with hulls composed of a foot or more of steel armor.

[NeoMorph]

I was being sarcastic azazel1024, which was why I said "Heh, Kevlar on a spacecraft hull." - I probably should have added a "*rolleyese*" after that sentence I guess.

Sometimes it's hard to put over meaning on a forum.

[azazel1024]

Sorry...I probably should have read that the way it was intended. I am having a literal day today. See the sun is out, it is literally day!

[Guest]

Here's what they're using in place of monolithic shielding. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shielding

[Boris_T_Roach]

Astronomically low or not, it's possible. I had 20 ships in orbit at one time and on one launch had an unintentional rendezvous with another ship and missed it by less than 1500m.

I was doing a nuclear booster launch for my next Joolian mission, thought.. lets take it upto 180km .. see if my tug can get it there and get back (120km is the usual height).. but I forgot to check where KSS11 was (a 300 part 150meter long space station carrying Jeb, bill and bob that orbits at about 150km)

Anyway.... I'm flying away, watching Ap/Pe when suddenly the frame rate drops, and I think "what the " and a purple target goes by at an incredible rate, managed to click on it as it retreated and got about 600 m/sec relative speed .. yikes

would have been one big bang if it had hit

But theres a pic somewhere of a shuttle radiator that took a debris hit and its one big melted hole.. but then having the chinese wack a defunct satellite with a missile did'nt help either.... thats where a bunch of debris has come from