News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:ESA satellite dodges 'mega constellation' by ovi256 on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @08:01AM (#20865688)
Yeah, you can feel the bad blood behind the press release.

Basically ESA nicely asked SpaceX to maneuver their sat and shorten its lifetime - they don't have a legal basis or enforcement mechanism anyway. SpaceX pretended not to hear until it was too late and ESA went ahead with their contingency plan of burning their own sat's fuel and lifetime instead.

Re:ESA satellite dodges 'mega constellation' by blauekapelle on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @10:09AM (#20866594)
ESA said they didn't ask spacex to move their sat, they just said they let them know. Spacex replied they had no intention to move their sat, since it was in deorbit testing.
Re:ESA satellite dodges 'mega constellation' by russdill on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @09:01AM (#20866034)
If it was really about burning fuel, ESA would not have waited until half an orbit before. The longer you wait, the more you have to burn.
Re:ESA satellite dodges 'mega constellation' by tehbeard on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @09:35AM (#20866311)
Not really.

a. They did an altitude increase. There's no real gains from an earlier burn that one might get when doing something like a hohmann transfer.

b. Half an orbit before out means more/better telemetry to work with.

c. They are from a quick google, well within the range where atmospheric drag plays a role, and you need to do station keeping. leaving it this late means you don't "waste" fuel from drag.

Admittedly, my only credentials for this are a few thousand hours in KSP and reading around the subject. Anyone with a proper degree on this is welcome to correct me.

Re:ESA satellite dodges 'mega constellation' by russdill on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @11:54AM (#20867825)
In that case they were simply adjusting their station keeping schedule and minimum (if any) fuel would be wasted.

If that wasn't the case, they could raise or lower the altitude slightly several orbits before the "event" causing them to arrive at the intersection point earlier or later. For a desired time delta, the sooner your perform your altitude change the smaller the changed required.

Re:ESA satellite dodges 'mega constellation' by october_sky on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @11:46AM (#20867714)
Sure, but I'm positive the ESA's argument is their fuel burn should have been zero.
Re:ESA satellite dodges 'mega constellation' by JshWright on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @09:27AM (#20866256)
I haven't seen any mention of ESA "nicely asking" SpaceX to maneuver. Is that referenced in another article?
Re:ESA satellite dodges 'mega constellation' by zaarn on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @09:29AM (#20866276)
The sat in question was in deorbit testing, it's lifetime was already short.