Scientists hope harpoons can skewer space junk crisis.

STEVENAGE, England (Reuters) - A European satellite launched this week
to try out ways of tackling the growing amount of garbage in space will
use technology as familiar to the ancient Romans as astronauts - nets
and harpoons.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-br...-idUKKCN1HD27B
--
Bod

On 4/7/2018 10:43 AM, Bod wrote:
Scientists hope harpoons can skewer space junk crisis.

STEVENAGE, England (Reuters) - A European satellite launched this week
to try out ways of tackling the growing amount of garbage in space will
use technology as familiar to the ancient Romans as astronauts - nets
and harpoons.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-br...-idUKKCN1HD27B

Doesn't anybody ever do math anymore?
What's the mean distance between recoverable objects?
What's the energy cost of a right turn in orbit?
What do you do when you have it captured?
What does "burn up in the atmosphere" mean?
If you're not converting it to energy, the mass is still
there somewhere. Just say it contributes to global warming
and huge resources will be allocated to fixing it.

Capturing more than a tiny fraction of the junk in space would be
PROHIBITIVELY EXPENSIVE. You don't need more than a brain to figger
that out.
Anything posing a threat to humanity greater than that expense should
never be put into space in the first place.

There ARE situations where money is no object.
Destroying your enemy's implements of war in space is one such...
But it would be much cheaper if we could just get along and quit
trying to impose our will on others.
I wonder who is funding the study.

On 07/04/2018 19:48, mike wrote:
On 4/7/2018 10:43 AM, Bod wrote:
Scientists hope harpoons can skewer space junk crisis.

STEVENAGE, England (Reuters) - A European satellite launched this week
to try out ways of tackling the growing amount of garbage in space will
use technology as familiar to the ancient Romans as astronauts - nets
and harpoons.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-br...-idUKKCN1HD27B


Doesn't anybody ever do math anymore?
What's the mean distance between recoverable objects?
What's the energy cost of a right turn in orbit?
What do you do when you have it captured?
What does "burn up in the atmosphere" mean?
If you're not converting it to energy, the mass is still
there somewhere.Â* Just say it contributes to global warming
and huge resources will be allocated to fixing it.

Capturing more than a tiny fraction of the junk in space would be
PROHIBITIVELY EXPENSIVE.Â* You don't need more than a brain to figger
that out.
Anything posing a threat to humanity greater than that expense should
never be put into space in the first place.

There ARE situations where money is no object.
Destroying your enemy's implements of war in space is one such...
But it would be much cheaper if we could just get along and quit
trying to impose our will on others.
I wonder who is funding the study.

The whole point of exploring the universe is because of mans natural
desire to find out what is out there and to find new elements etc, which
will benefit us on Earth in the future.
As for the satellites, they are up there to benefit us all.

--
Bod

On 4/7/2018 12:01 PM, Bod wrote:
On 07/04/2018 19:48, mike wrote:
On 4/7/2018 10:43 AM, Bod wrote:
Scientists hope harpoons can skewer space junk crisis.

STEVENAGE, England (Reuters) - A European satellite launched this week
to try out ways of tackling the growing amount of garbage in space will
use technology as familiar to the ancient Romans as astronauts - nets
and harpoons.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-br...-idUKKCN1HD27B


Doesn't anybody ever do math anymore?
What's the mean distance between recoverable objects?
What's the energy cost of a right turn in orbit?
What do you do when you have it captured?
What does "burn up in the atmosphere" mean?
If you're not converting it to energy, the mass is still
there somewhere. Just say it contributes to global warming
and huge resources will be allocated to fixing it.

Capturing more than a tiny fraction of the junk in space would be
PROHIBITIVELY EXPENSIVE. You don't need more than a brain to figger
that out.
Anything posing a threat to humanity greater than that expense should
never be put into space in the first place.

There ARE situations where money is no object.
Destroying your enemy's implements of war in space is one such...
But it would be much cheaper if we could just get along and quit
trying to impose our will on others.
I wonder who is funding the study.

The whole point of exploring the universe is because of mans natural
desire to find out what is out there and to find new elements etc, which
will benefit us on Earth in the future.
As for the satellites, they are up there to benefit us all.

The thread is not about benefit of satellites.
It's about what to do with them when they no longer benefit us.
In virtually all cases, the sensible answer is, "nothing."