<![CDATA[io9: space junk]]> http://tags.lifehacker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/io9.com.png <![CDATA[io9: space junk]]> http://io9.com/tag/spacejunk http://io9.com/tag/spacejunk <![CDATA[The Electric Rocket That May Put A Robotic Inchworm On The Moon]]> Here's the "underdog" electric-powered rocket that just may conquer the Moon and win Google's $30 million Lunar X Prize. The Lunatrex rocket uses a slow-but-steady approach, taking months instead of days to reach the Moon.

Google's Lunar X Prize requires teams to put a robot on the moon, have it travel at least 500 meters across the lunar surface, and send high-definition photos back to Earth. There are 17 teams competing for the $30 million jackpot.

The Lunatrex team's approach involves having a rocket build up speed while orbiting the Earth, before finally shooting off towards the Moon. The slow approach means you'd have weeks, not minutes, to make course corrections. Lunatrex is using an electric engine that shoots out a stream of charged particles to accelerate slowly, which has already worked well in probes like Deep Space 1 and the Dawn probe.

Lunatrex's lunar robot designs are also unconventional: one is an earthworm-shaped bot that would use piezoelectric "muscles" to scoot across the lunar surface. Another isocahedron-shaped robot would have 12 legs that could move in any direction — and the legs could double as transceiver antennae. Lunatrex is a consortium of aerospace companies, plus the University of Dayton, OH.

It's exciting to see somebody putting money and thought into coming up with innovative methods of traveling into space, some of which will hopefully benefit space exploration for decades to come. At the same time, it's a little worrisome to see Google's millions going into a contest to encourage entrepreneurs to litter our orbit with even more masses of space junk from the various failed attempts to snag the prize. Future space probes will have to have extra-dextrous steering mechanisms to avoid the debris of today's whiz-bang lunar vehicles. [Space.com]

]]>
http://io9.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5280742&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Giant Fireball Blazes to Earth in Texas]]> Experts have been scratching their heads over a huge, bright fireball that zoomed out of the sky over Texas yesterday. Reporters and the FAA claimed it was satellite debris, but astronomers say they're wrong.

Phil Plait of Bad Astronomy has a terrific breakdown of events, explaining how rumors of satellite debris got started and the misinformation was passed around. Confusing matters was the fact that two satellites collided over Earth a couple of weeks ago, so it's possible we might see some junk hitting the planet after such an event. Plus, there was another fireball over Kentucky on Friday. This combination of factors had people believing a rain of satellite parts was falling over the American South.

But after watching the video and doing research on the event, Plait says definitively that it's not space junk:

The video shows the fireball to be moving very rapidly. Typically, meteors come into Earth's atmosphere at 20-50 km/sec (though they can be moving much faster), and burn up 50-100 km high. Man-made space debris re-entering is moving at slower than orbital speed so the max speed is about 8 km/sec. It also burns up lower, and generally you can see flames and whatnot coming off.

I've seen man-made debris re-enter, and it's very different than natural meteors. The difference in speed is very obvious. Right there, that's enough to make me think this was a single natural object.

It's possible to get collisional debris moving more rapidly, but it's difficult. The two satellites closed in on each other at about 10 km/sec, and any shrapnel from that event would most likely be moving at roughly that same speed. If one satellite slammed into, say, an antenna first, then the lower mass antenna might get a pretty hefty acceleration from it, but the amount of energy dumped into it would most likely turn it into a bunch of teeny pieces (remember, the energy of impact was like several tons of TNT). A small object would not have been as bright as the fireball seen.

Also, you'd have to have a pretty special set of circumstances to get any debris from the satellites to re-enter our atmosphere so soon after the collision. It's far more likely that it will be months before we see any of that shrapnel burning up.

So all in all, I am pretty sure what was seen was natural: a rock or a piece of metal from an asteroid.

Read more over at Bad Astronomy!


]]>
http://io9.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5154602&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[The Garbage that Smashed to Earth from Space]]> Here lies the wreckage of the Genesis spacecraft in the Utah desert. It's just one of many space vehicles that have returned planetside in speeding balls of screaming fire.


Here you can see an even more haunting photo, of a family in Texas who discovered a smoking chunk of the space shuttle Columbia in their front yard.

Here's a farmer in Queensland, Australia, who found this unidentified hunk of metal on his property last year. Though nobody is quiet sure where the junk came from, it's possible that it's from a rocket used to launch a communications satellite.

No one is really sure where this rock of metal alloy came from either, though it most certainly is not from nature. It crashed into a New Jersey home in 2007.

As space junk crashing to Earth becomes more and more common, I can't help but wonder who will be liable for damages it causes. If a chunk of a satellite or rocket crushes your car or injures you, who is responsible? The creator of the space vehicle? The launch facility? Somebody has to pay those damages.

See more amazing images of space junk that's fallen to Earth, or remains precariously wobbling through orbit, in the UK Guardian.

All photos via Reuters except mystery blob of New Jersey via Mike Derer/AP

]]>
http://io9.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5152883&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Robot Repair Team Keeps Satellites Spinning]]> A lot of the satellites we depend on for modern life are in high orbits, beyond the reach of Earth-based repair missions. It would be prohibitively expensive, if not impossible, to send a team of astronauts up there. As a result, when those satellites fail or run out of fuel, they become space junk, and billions of dollars must be spent to replace them — until now. A team at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario is developing a robot repair team that could keep those satellites in orbit for years to come.

It isn't possible to repair satellites in high orbit by remote control, because the radio lag is too great. With the damaged satellite hurtling through space, the operator couldn't react quickly enough to accomplish anything. The Autonomous Space Servicing Vehicle (ASSV - yes, they actually use this acronym) gets around this by sending robots up to do the tricky job of collecting the satellite. They load it into a repair bay. There, the static satellite can be successfully fixed via telerobotics.

That last bit is actually a little disappointing, because I was initially picturing hundreds of satellites steadily orbiting Earth, doing their jobs as a sturdy team of robots keeps them fully functional centuries after humanity has breathed its last gasp. What lonely radio signals would they continue to bounce back and forth as they keep watch over the empty world beneath them?

But in truth, humans will be needed to keep things running. While it's not as poetic, it could save telecom companies and world governments enormous amounts of money. Image by: NASA.

New robotic repair system will fix ailing satellites. [Queen's University]

]]>
http://io9.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5058435&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Biggest garbage dump: Oceans or Space?]]> People are good at spreading trash around the globe, and even our vast oceans are starting to fill up with (mostly plastic) refuse. Witness the North Pacific subtropical gyre, a floating trashcan the size of Texas. But outer space is closing the gap, according to a recent article in the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (thanks, TreeHugger). We've heard a lot about the threat space debris poses to expensive communications satellites (read: Pentagon is getting worried about damaging their pretty spy sats), but what about crewed flights? Tourists' flights into low Earth orbit are going to be bumpy rides if we don't get to fixing his problem soon.

]]>
http://io9.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=382235&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Watch Out for Spy Satellite Debris Raining from the Sky]]> A bus-sized spy satellite, made by and for the U.S., has lost power and will crash down on Earth as early as February. Apparently, nobody knows if the satellite has been dead for a year or just a few days. (Great going, intelligence geeks.) The best part? According to AP, the only comment the National Security Council would make came from a flak who said, "Appropriate government agencies are monitoring the situation." Most experts agree the debris from the satellite will be minimal — far less than the space shuttle crash, and certainly less than what smashed into the Indian Ocean when the 78-ton abandoned space station Skylab smash-landed in 1979. (Thanks, Morgan!) [AP]

]]>
http://io9.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=349492&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Suicidal Russian Space Junk Plunges Into Earth's Atmosphere]]> Sturdy, car-sized space freighter Progress 26 was launched off the International Space Station on Saturday, filled to the brim with trash — basically, all the crap (literally and figuratively) the crew had been accumulating for weeks. Progress 27, another uncrewed freighter, will be arriving with fresh food and supplies from Earth for the ISS cosmonauts. No word on what will happen to the poop-packed Progress 26 once it's been launched from the ISS, but probably it will meet the same fate as its predecessor Progress 23 last March, which was programmed to burn itself up in our atmosphere. Russian Trash Ship [Space.com]

]]>
http://io9.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=337133&view=rss&microfeed=true