• Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    It will obviously be in a very low orbit, because that’s the easiest to reach and construct…

    Well, for a bunch of reasons, these space data centers probably won’t be at very low orbits. First and foremost, very low orbits like the ones starlink uses experience a lot of atmospheric drag. With the huge solar arrays these data centers will need, that high drag environment is a killer. Going just a bit farther out would significantly reduce that drag. Also, latency isn’t a huge concern with space data centers, so very low orbits aren’t required. Lastly, since those low orbits are so highly valuable and contested, it just doesn’t make sense to put something there that doesn’t need to be there.

    TLDR: Space data center orbits are likely to be somewhere between 500 - 1000 km altitudes.

    And yes, that’s in untouchable range for anything but advanced militaries.

    What it’s not untouchable to is legislation. That’s the practical way to fight it.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      I really hope they don’t go into the 700-1000km range with something of this scale if it actually happens as thats where a real risk of debris staying in orbit for hundreds or thousands of years starts to happen if something catastrophic happens to the constellation.

      China blew up a satellite in a test in the 800km area and it’ll be there for hundreds of years.

      • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Yeah, that’s a valid point. And yeah, that’s totally where they’re gonna put them. They’re gonna be huge, delicate targets…

        I’m generally pro space, I think all the massive advances in space flight in these last couple of decades has been truly amazing. That said, I wish I had a more positive way to spin this, but yeah, that’s a serious concern. That’s bad.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          It won’t happen, but if globally we could agree to put a moratorium on large constellations in those orbits until we have more experience with constellations in the really low orbits, that would at least help and give us more time to learn. Without everyone agreeing though, someone else will just be like, MINE and fill it anyway.

          Edit: like lets see what happens as starlink becomes even bigger and moves into 10s of thousands, and kupier appears etc before moving up higher.

          • OwOarchist@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Very low orbits are less of a concern, though. Because if the worst happens, they and the vast majority of their debris will be slowed by atmospheric drag and fall relatively quickly.

            • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 hours ago

              Thats why I said we should do it in the very low orbits for awhile before going to the 700-1000km range.

              800km is already in the hundreds of years range.