Ideally a satellite is in a given orbit for years. If junk is destroying it in weeks or even months you’ve got a massive issue.
However a rocket is spending in a seconds in that same orbit. Thus a rocket passing through may only have say 1:10,000 odds of a collision on its way to mars while satellites are getting shredded.
So you don’t think the 1:10k odds compounded over every space launch are enough to be a problem?
I was thinking that maybe as you get to a scale where you have things coming and going all the time, and each time they have to pass through the debris layer, and if they have bad luck they become part of that debris, that eventually you get to a point where even just passing through that layer is untenable. But you don’t think that is likely even for a society sending out interplanetary vessels every day?
Being hit isn’t the same as being destroyed, you can track and avoid large objects, and small are survivable in the short term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield Collisions however keep adding up until a satellite fails.
Second an outbound rocket need not be in orbit, so if it is destroyed that may not result in extra orbital debris the overwhelming majority of mass could fall back to earth.
Also, Kessler syndrome isn’t a forever thing. There’s a reason planets have rings not debris clouds. It’s possible to have a steady state where the rate you’re making it worse is balanced with the rate things are naturally clearing.
integrate risk over time. if you have a high target orbit outside the "kessler belt" then you don't spend much time going through it. though this requires a fairly direct orbital insertion. slow orbit raising would have a higher risk, but even that would still be lower than for any satellite intended to operate for years and decades in an affected orbit.
It really depends on how much junk actually is there and in what orbits; especially at 500 km up, space is big. The surface area of the earth is 510.100.000 square kilometers, at 500 kilometers the 'surface area' is a multiple of that (I can't math), surely there's enough gaps or lower-density areas at that height even if there was a catastrophic Kessler Syndrome event.
Ideally a satellite is in a given orbit for years. If junk is destroying it in weeks or even months you’ve got a massive issue.
However a rocket is spending in a seconds in that same orbit. Thus a rocket passing through may only have say 1:10,000 odds of a collision on its way to mars while satellites are getting shredded.
Thanks for the explanation.
So you don’t think the 1:10k odds compounded over every space launch are enough to be a problem?
I was thinking that maybe as you get to a scale where you have things coming and going all the time, and each time they have to pass through the debris layer, and if they have bad luck they become part of that debris, that eventually you get to a point where even just passing through that layer is untenable. But you don’t think that is likely even for a society sending out interplanetary vessels every day?
A problem, but not an insurmountable one.
Being hit isn’t the same as being destroyed, you can track and avoid large objects, and small are survivable in the short term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield Collisions however keep adding up until a satellite fails.
Second an outbound rocket need not be in orbit, so if it is destroyed that may not result in extra orbital debris the overwhelming majority of mass could fall back to earth.
Also, Kessler syndrome isn’t a forever thing. There’s a reason planets have rings not debris clouds. It’s possible to have a steady state where the rate you’re making it worse is balanced with the rate things are naturally clearing.
integrate risk over time. if you have a high target orbit outside the "kessler belt" then you don't spend much time going through it. though this requires a fairly direct orbital insertion. slow orbit raising would have a higher risk, but even that would still be lower than for any satellite intended to operate for years and decades in an affected orbit.
It really depends on how much junk actually is there and in what orbits; especially at 500 km up, space is big. The surface area of the earth is 510.100.000 square kilometers, at 500 kilometers the 'surface area' is a multiple of that (I can't math), surely there's enough gaps or lower-density areas at that height even if there was a catastrophic Kessler Syndrome event.
The surface area at 500 km is 1.16 of the Earth surface area.