Something tells me the data that is coming from satellitemap.space is very accurate especially since the NOAA has a lot of job openings now.
Is it a coincidence that the when Elon Musk makes a douche move, more of the satellites are lost?
No lol
It’s not a coincidence that people post more about Starlink satellites burning up when Elon Musk makes a douche move, because that gets the clicks.
First of all, I don’t give a shit about Elon, a company and what it accomplishes is more than just one person.
I just want to highlight that the current Starlink fleet consisted of over 5000 satellites as of August, losing 300 isn’t that crazy when you actually consider the constellation itself as a whole.
In any business involving physical hardware, there is an expected rate of failure, and from what I can tell this is completely within the foreseen range. With the plans to expand to over 40000 satellites in the future, even losing 500 units is a little over 1% of the total - that’s a 99% success rate.
Even with the current loss, that’s only around 6% of the total - probably painful, but definitely not the massive “L” that some people are thinking it is.
Is this news? They are in low orbits and are meant to come down and burn up, what is the aignificance?
Elon = bad
Yeah I don’t know why this topic keeps coming up. They do this by design. I swear Elon haters are just as annoying as the Elon fanboys.
These person keeps making accounts to spam their site. If it was actual news reputable sites would be picking it up because musk’s constant fuck ups are great for ad views.
how many does he have to lose before the whole thing isnt worth it?
More than this, because this loss rate is designed for. The constellation is at a very low altitude and is intended to be constantly replaced like this.
Well it won’t work out very well when they already have less than 15% of the subscribers they thought they would have by now.
And yet they are already profitable.
How does the company stay afloat when they’re constantly replacing satellites? The money, the logistics, and most of all, the materials. What a waste.
Because they launch them in large batches using a reusable rocket, so it doesn’t actually cost much. They did work out the economics of Starlink before they started building the system.
When they worked out those details they also thought they would have 20,000,000 subscribers before now and not just 2,000,000
They are nevertheless already profitable, and they haven’t even begun using Starship to launch satellites yet.
All that sweet gov’t funding doesn’t hurt the bottom line.
There are government users among their customers, yes. Customers are customers. Is this supposed to be a negative?
Musk is going to single handedly give the Earth Kessler Syndrome.
I don’t like Muskrat at all, but as far as I can tell the satellites have been in low earth orbit and burn up in the atmosphere as to not create such a situation
