5 ms·
I was surprised to read they don't expect atmospheric burnup and are targeting a splash down in the Indian Ocean. I really hope someone didn't mess up some mun
by pplante 2y ago
I was surprised to read they don't expect atmospheric burnup and are targeting a splash down in the Indian Ocean. I really hope someone didn't mess up some mundane detail in their calculations.
- ricardobeat 2y agoThat may be an oversight in the release, how would the mock satellites survive re-entry without heat shields?
- jjk166 2y agoSurvive as in "remain undamaged and functional"? Impossible. Survive as in "something solid makes it to the surface" is quite easy. Most satellites have debris land on Earth upon de-orbiting.
- verzali 2y agoThey don't. Only very big or dense satellites will have anything reach the ground. Most burn up completely in the atmosphere.
- jjk166 2y agoYes they do. Whether something burns up is primarily based on melting point. Steel and titanium components typically survive while aluminum does not. The overall size and average density of the satellite do not matter - they break up into small pieces long before they experience significant heating.
- skissane 2y agoI suspect they actually do expect them to burn-up on re-entry... but by telling the FAA they may splashdown, it absolves them of any problems if for whatever reason they fail to fully do so. And then the public communication has to match what they told the FAA.
- verzali 2y agoThey would normally have to do a debris analysis. I would expect them to burn up, because we'll have a real problem if Starlink satellites start surviving reentry. But it's possible that since this is a very low injection point and speeds will be lower that some parts might survive. If they do, it makes Starship survival look less impressive though...