Most active commenters
  • nradov(3)

←back to thread

Yi Peng 3 crossed both cables C-Lion 1 and BSC at times matching when they broke

(bsky.app)
499 points perihelions | 17 comments | 20 Nov 24 06:56 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
nabla9 ◴[20 Nov 24 08:15 UTC] No.42191758[source]▶
October 2023 there was similar incident where Chinese cargo ship cut Balticonnector cable and EE-S1 cable. Chip named 'Newnew Polar Bear' under Chinese flag and Chinese company Hainan Xin Xin Yang Shipping Co, Ltd. (aka Torgmoll) with CEO named Yelena V. Maksimova, drags anchor in the seabed cutting cables. Chinese investigation claims storm was the reason, but there was no storm, just normal windy autumn weather. The ship just lowered one anchor and dragged it with engines running long time across the seabed until the anchor broke.

These things happen sometimes, ship anchors sometimes damage cables, but not this often and without serious problems in the ship. Russians are attempting plausible deniability.

replies(8): >>42191786 #>>42191808 #>>42191875 #>>42191880 #>>42192160 #>>42197213 #>>42197559 #>>42201843 #
cabirum ◴[20 Nov 24 09:27 UTC] No.42192160[source]▶
After the Nordstream pipeline attacked and destroyed, its reasonable to expect shortened lifetimes for undersea cables and sattelites.
replies(5): >>42192401 #>>42194448 #>>42197215 #>>42198095 #>>42199025 #
nradov ◴[20 Nov 24 14:58 UTC] No.42194448[source]▶
Yes, this is why having a prompt satellite launch capability to replace attrition losses is now a strategic imperative. We need to be able to put up new ones in a matter of hours, not months.
replies(5): >>42194640 #>>42194810 #>>42196625 #>>42196917 #>>42197964 #
1. Gud ◴[20 Nov 24 15:20 UTC] No.42194640[source]▶
If someone starts blowing up satellites it’s pretty much game over for space based communications.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

replies(4): >>42195155 #>>42196406 #>>42196604 #>>42197152 #
2. nradov ◴[20 Nov 24 16:01 UTC] No.42195155[source]▶
The military is shifting toward LEO constellations for communications such as SpaceX Starshield. Kessler syndrome isn't a serious concern for those because the orbits decay fairly quickly anyway.
replies(1): >>42196511 #
3. tialaramex ◴[20 Nov 24 17:45 UTC] No.42196406[source]▶
Kessler is often overplayed. Kessler trashes a low orbit and you wouldn't want to launch more birds into the trashed orbit. But, loads of com sats live in MEO or GEO, which is far too high for the numbers to work. They're all fine.

You will even see Kessler cited as some sort of barrier to leaving, which is nonsense.

Imagine there's a 1x1m spot where on average once per week, entirely at random and without warning a giant boulder falls from the sky and if you're there you will be crushed under the boulder. Clearly living on that spot is a terrible idea, you'd die. But merely running through it is basically fine, there's a tiny chance the boulder hits you by coincidentally arriving as you do, but we live with risks that big all the time. If you're an American commuter for example that's the sort of risk you shrug off.

Likewise, Kessler isn't a barrier to leaving, humans won't be leaving because there's nowhere to go. The only habitable planet is this one, and we're already here.

replies(4): >>42196635 #>>42197720 #>>42198119 #>>42198234 #
4. yencabulator ◴[20 Nov 24 17:57 UTC] No.42196511[source]▶
That "quickly" is on the order of years (as opposed to decades, centuries, etc). If the Starlink constellation goes boom, you can't start launching new ones for several years -- and then the build-up would take years, from there.
replies(1): >>42197520 #
5. varispeed ◴[20 Nov 24 18:07 UTC] No.42196604[source]▶
Could they place a giant electromagnet in space to collect debris?
replies(2): >>42196909 #>>42197180 #
6. jgalt212 ◴[20 Nov 24 18:11 UTC] No.42196635[source]▶
The latency on GEO orbits exclude them from many use cases.
7. kube-system ◴[20 Nov 24 18:44 UTC] No.42196909[source]▶
Space is too big, and the field of even the world's strongest electromagnets are too small for this to be practical. And even if it did work, you'd only collect ferromagnetic material.
8. elif ◴[20 Nov 24 19:14 UTC] No.42197152[source]▶
Not true. China has taken down 2 US satellites in the last few years.
replies(2): >>42198152 #>>42198673 #
9. datadrivenangel ◴[20 Nov 24 19:17 UTC] No.42197180[source]▶
A large enough electromagnet could actually increase effective drag in conductive materials, which may help. All the non-conductive materials would still be there, and paint chips can be brutal at orbital speeds.
10. nradov ◴[20 Nov 24 19:58 UTC] No.42197520{3}[source]▶
Nah. In any major future conflict, the combatants will go ahead and launch replacement satellites immediately regardless of the risks or long-term consequences (or they'll do it at least as long as their manufacturing and launch facilities survive). A constellation of hundreds of satellites can't go "boom" all at once. Even with a bunch of orbital debris floating around the hazards will be sparse and some satellites will live long enough to be operationally useful.
replies(1): >>42198062 #
11. Gud ◴[20 Nov 24 20:19 UTC] No.42197720[source]▶
LEO is where starlink is stationed. Really, there is no good scenario where LEO is unusable due to some dumb reason, like blowing up junk in space. I'm not sure our "world leaders" appreciate this.
12. yencabulator ◴[20 Nov 24 21:00 UTC] No.42198062{4}[source]▶
For the purposes of the crisis, sure. But commerce and average consumer internet access will suffer hugely. Similarly, severing the sea cable had no direct military effect, but was economic damage. Kessler syndrome is still a serious concern even in LEO, just not to the same extent of practically denying access to space for the foreseeable future.
13. rickydroll ◴[20 Nov 24 21:07 UTC] No.42198119[source]▶
GEO is safe for now. But... https://spacenews.com/intelsat-33e-loses-power-in-geostation...

The most likely explanation for the unexplained disassembly is that Boeing made it. Second, most likely, is a collision with a hunk of something invisible.

14. K0balt ◴[20 Nov 24 21:11 UTC] No.42198152[source]▶
Really? Thats wild. How is this not seen as a military provocation?
15. davidt84 ◴[20 Nov 24 21:20 UTC] No.42198234[source]▶
GEO is very cramped. It's just a circle, not a sphere.

Edit: I guess I was assuming geostationary. There's a whole sphere of geosynchronous orbits to play with.

Edit2: I was right the first time, GEO (geosynchronous equatoral orbit) / GSO (geosynchronous orbit), apparently. Now my head hurts.

replies(1): >>42198712 #
16. bgarbiak ◴[20 Nov 24 22:14 UTC] No.42198673[source]▶
They shoot down their own redundant satellites, and it was in 2007 in 2010.
17. tialaramex ◴[20 Nov 24 22:18 UTC] No.42198712{3}[source]▶
> GEO is very cramped. It's just a circle, not a sphere.

"cramped" the way that like, Alaska is cramped on account of how everybody has to live on the surface, not evenly distributed through the volume of the planet?

Like yeah, it's "just a circle" but did you check the radius of that circle?

Remember if there's debris, the debris isn't stuck in the circle, but, any time it's not in the circle it's harmless. This has the effect of significantly defusing the problem, so in total it's too low risk to be worth considering.