Satellite collision: brief update on Hubble and debris
How the record amount of debris could affect the Hubble repair mission remains unclear
font_down font_up Text Size

Editor's note: The following story was originally posted February 12 and then updated February 21 after a February 20 press briefing from NASA. Officials said it was unclear yet whether debris from the collision would pose too great a risk for a planned mission to upgrade the Hubble Space Telescope.
 

View videos illustrating the satellite collisions.

The orbital highways above Earth have been getting more crowded for years, but until February 10 there had been no local big bang.

Two large satellites — a functioning U.S. device and a nonoperating Russian instrument — collided in Earth orbit about 800 kilometers over Siberia on February 10, creating a swarm of some 600 chunks of debris. “This is the first time we’ve had an accidental collision of this magnitude,” says Eugene G. Stansbery, an orbital debris expert at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston.

The pieces have remained in the orbital plane of each satellite but are spreading out in altitude. Stansbery said that computer simulations indicated only a slight risk that some of the spreading debris could hit the International Space Station, which orbits 350 km above Earth. Debris is denser at 600 km above Earth, where the Hubble Space Telescope orbits, but the observatory is a much smaller target, he added.

NASA officials announced February 20 that the agency would not know until mid-March whether the debris in the vicinity of the Hubble Space Telescope would pose too great a risk for shuttle astronauts to repair and refurbish the telescope. That repair mission is now scheduled for May.

The U.S. satellite was an Iridium 33, a common telecommunications spacecraft. The Russian device was a Kosmos 2251. The crash destroyed both satellites, which had orbits about 90 degrees apart relative to Earth.

Over the past two decades, three much smaller satellite crashes have occurred, Stansbery added. In 1991, a nonfunctioning Russian navigation satellite hit debris from another Russian satellite. Five years later, a French satellite called Cerise collided with the body of a French rocket. Most recently, in 2005, a U.S. rocket body collided with the third stage of a Chinese launch vehicle. But each of those collisions generated only one or two pieces of debris.



Satellite collision, take 1 from Science News on Vimeo.

Computer models (Gaussian model shown) depict the spreading of debris from the satellite crash.

Video courtesy of Analytical Graphics, Inc. (www.agi.com).


Satellite collision, take 2 from Science News on Vimeo.

Computer models (Evolve-based model shown) depict the spreading of debris from the satellite crash.

Video courtesy of Analytical Graphics, Inc. (www.agi.com).
Found in: Atom & Cosmos and Technology
Comments 5
  • It must have occurred to SOMEbody that, no matter the cost, an effort must eventually be made to gather up the orbital debris. Just tracking all of it is NOT a solution.

    In light of the amount of this stuff, an ongoing mission to collect it would certainly offer job security to a good many people.
    Paul Baker Paul Baker
    Feb. 22, 2009 at 2:15pm
  • It's no secret that the current administration would love to have the funds allocated to the Hubble repair redirected to other purposes. But to just cancel it to spend on social engineering would have been politically unpopular.

    The satellite collision provides a defensible excuse on the grounds of safety that they may use to kill the repair mission and abandon Hubble to doom.
    Fred Houlihan Fred Houlihan
    Feb. 22, 2009 at 7:52pm
  • To suggest that the Obama Administration would "love" to cancel the Hubble repair mission is curious nonsense. Obama has pledged to "restore science to its rightful place" -- and that is far higher than in the faith-based Administration of the past eight years. If the mission is canceled (a sad prospect, to be sure), it will be for very real concerns about safety.
    Jon Alexandr Jon Alexandr
    Feb. 23, 2009 at 12:18am
  • Well, it would be a good test of building a big sunshade for climate engineering. First build a big catcher's mitt to collect material to be used, then orbit a mass driver or solar smelter to do something useful with it ....
    hank hank
    Feb. 23, 2009 at 9:11pm
  • Suitably shielded tanks of water designed to release a continuous spray at low impulse which are launched in counter orbits within the same planes as these debris fields can contribute significantly to the deorbiting and decrease of the population of the TENS OF THOUSANDS of smaller pieces of debris (up to 10 centimeters in size) that were potentially produced as a the result of this collision which are not part of the estimated "600 fragments" typically cited in popular news accounts, just because they DON'T return radar signals.

    Such water tank satellites can easily be equipped with modest thrusters to deorbit themselves after depleting their heavy stores of water to prevent any further increase in the population of fragments at this altitude. But any fragment above a centimeter in size can kill operational satellites or any of their vital instruments with a strike in these crowded polar orbits. Moreover, such strikes can add to the number of fragments that are large enough to pose a substantial hazard to even more spacecraft, manned or unmanned in the future.

    It is now ESSENTIAL (NO LONGER JUST HYPOTHETICAL) that some means like that mentioned above of removing the tiny bits - which by far outnumber the larger radar-tracked fragments - is employed, along with the immediate establishment of international protocols to regulate the 'untrammeled freedom' of nations to place payloads and their final stage boosters into any orbit they like, before we encase ourselves within an impenetrable barrier that cuts us off from our future as a space-faring civilization.

    This is a problem we can already have done plenty to prevent in the past, and it is a problem we can still deal with. But it will almost certainly transform into a problem we can't deal with for a long time to come if just another several collisions within these favored polar orbiting regimes (at between 700 to 1000 km altitudes) takes place near the polar regions where their population density is disquietingly high. It's time to act now.
    Adolf Schaller Adolf Schaller
    Feb. 25, 2009 at 11:06am
Post a comment

Please login or register to participate.


Advertisement
Suggested Reading:
seperator
  • Ron Cowen. "Last Call." The planned mission to updgrade Hubble. Science News, September 27, 2008. [Go to]
Reader Favorites:
seperator
SN on the Web:
seperator