this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2026
79 points (96.5% liked)

World News

55137 readers
3185 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
lemmyAtom@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
79
‘This feels fragile’: how a satellite-smashing chain reaction could spiral out of control (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 5 hours ago by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/world@lemmy.world
12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In the 21st century, private companies began to launch satellites at unprecedented rates. Today, Earth’s orbit is packed with thousands of satellites and fragments – around 32,000 in total – all circling the planet at immense speed. This is even after accounting for the fact that a lot of satellites have fallen out of orbit and been destroyed.

Some reports suggest that by the end of this decade there could more than 60,000 active satellites in space. Launch by launch, what began with a handful of scientific and military spacecraft has accelerated into a constant flow of objects, publicly and privately owned, placed into different orbital lanes, each serving a variety of purposes.

There is now a diverse collection of satellites spinning around the globe, ​including communication​ and weather ​satellites​, navigation satellites and Earth observation technology that takes images of the surface.

The surge in orbital activity has created a significant collision risk. There have already been crashes, including a 2009 event where a US satellite hit a defunct Russia military satellite. Tens of thousands of tiny fragments of metal are now spinning at high velocities.

The big fear is that future collisions will cause a domino effect where Earth’s orbit becomes cluttered with tiny, high-speed bits of metal. That could create a near-impenetrable layer of debris that would make space launches so dangerous it would essentially trap humans on Earth.

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (2 children)

On the one hand, Kessler syndrome is scary. On the other hand, space is bigger than you think it is. Imagine the same article, but it's about 32,000 cars, boats, and airplanes spread around the land, seas, and sky. Reports say there could be as many as 60,000 such vehicles within the next decade. Collisions between such small entities across such a large area are unlikely, especially when they're at wildly different altitudes.

But on the other other hand, Kessler syndrome is the basis of one of my favorite animes so I still like when it comes up

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

It’s not like when two satellites collide they just fall to earth and stop causing problems.

If cars and boats created vast clouds of shrapnel that kept moving around when they collided, hitting other cars and boats and creating more shrapnel, the roads and seas would be impassable.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 59 minutes ago)

I mean, in LEO they kinda do. The majority of our satellites are in low orbit, and require regular boosts to stay in orbit. Atmospheric drag is still a problem out to thousands of miles. Also, I can't stress this enough, space is bigger than you think, and satellites are tiny. There is only a risk of collision at the point where two orbits intersect, if both satellites are at that point at the same time. Maybe if you have 12,000 satellites all orbiting at the exact same altitude with different inclinations, it could be an issue for those satellites. I'm not convinced that it's ever going to be a barrier to space travel.

[–] fartsparkles@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Untrackable shrapnel moving at up to 18,000 miles per hour…

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

18,000 miles per hour orbital velocity, but it's maybe a couple hundred miles per hour relative to any satellite it could realistically hit

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 1 points 6 minutes ago

That entirely depends on their inclination and where in their respective orbits they collide. Orbits can intersect at right angles even with relatively low inclination, meaning they’re colliding at those orbital speeds.

[–] Deme@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

Yes, space is big, but those objects are moving fast on intersecting paths. I'd recommend checking this out and also following @sundogplanets@mastodon.social

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Okay, I'm willing to grant it. If all maneuvers were to stop, there's a roughly 50% chance that one satellite would impact another satellite in about three days. I'm still not convinced it's an issue. What is the risk to something like the ISS or Hubble or anything in a geosynchronous orbit, versus the risk to starlink-31,299?

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago

Yeah. What people don't seem to realize is that even though space is big, it's still really crowded in near earth orbits.

The crash clock answers the question:

What is the expected time for a potential collision in LEO between tracked artificial objects — including satellites, debris, and abandoned rocket bodies — if all manoeuvres were to stop?

Say there were some dumb thing like an expired SSL certificate that prevented earth to ground communication. Just 6 years ago, you'd have half a year to resolve the issue before you'd expect there to be a collision. As of March 2026 it's down to just 3 days.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 20 points 5 hours ago

Kessler syndrome goes brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[–] classic@fedia.io 1 points 4 hours ago

That could create a near-impenetrable layer of debris that would make space launches so dangerous it would essentially trap humans on Earth.

Probably for the best

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 hours ago

Starlink is a front - it is actually designed to induce Kessler syndrome so that Musk can try to sell a solution.