What is going on guys?

    • theanon@lemmy.world
      cake
      OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They’ve lost almost 300 now in 2 months. That’s 5% of the fleet in 2 months. Not normal, also why are shilling for hundreds of millions of dollars in wasted satellites.

      • MartianSands@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They started launching in 2019, according to a quick look at Wikipedia. They told the general public (and regulatory agencies, I think) that the lifetime of the satellites was on the order of 5 years. The plan was to replace them frequently enough to maintain the constellation with that kind of service life (i.e. to launch the whole constellation worth of satellites every 5 years)

        Now, here we are 4 years later. It’s not terribly surprising if some of the early satellites are starting to reach the end of their lives.

        It’s going to be very expensive for them, but not an unexpected cost. This is the reason they’re so keen to start launching them on Starship

          • I_Miss_Daniel@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It might still be less environmentally damaging that running fibre to every starlink customer. That’s a lot of manufacturing and digging.

          • stevecrox@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            SpaceX have funded it privately. It apparently started operating at a profit this year.

          • jayrhacker@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            SpaceX is privately funded, NASA buys launches for it’s own purposes, but StarLink isn’t subsidized

              • CobraChicken@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Whoever is funding NASA should devote more funding to education - the need is clearly evident from your comments.

                  • CobraChicken@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Alright, you dumbass, I will entertain.

                    SpaceX sells a service that NASA buys. It’s cheaper and easier for NASA to contract out space launches & the R&D associated with it to other companies. It’s common for other government agencies to contract out to private companies for goods and services. SpaceX isn’t the only space company that receives contracts from NASA either. NASA is always looking to hedge their bet to not be too dependent on a single company.

                    Like any other company, SpaceX uses the profit from their business + investors to fund new ventures like Starlink. No matter what you think of Musk, Starlink has had a positive impact for a lot of people in rural areas. Starlink is faster, more reliable and costs less than traditional satellite internet. Even if this cost tax dollars, it would be dollars well spent as we’re connecting more of the country to high speed internet. This has direct social, educational and economical impact.

                    If you want NASA to stop hiring SpaceX for launches then it’ll hurt NASA too. They will have to spend a lot more money to R&D, test, build and maintain a new rocket program.