A satellite belonging to multinational service provider Intelsat mysteriously broke up in geostationary orbit over the weekend.

  • Rose56
    link
    fedilink
    English
    46 months ago

    I did read about this yesterday, and as far as I know the name of the sat is intelsat 33e and its for communication purposes. I’m curious to know what really happen, how it broke.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    376 months ago

    IS-33e was the second satellite to be launched as part of Boeing’s “next generation” EpicNG platform. The first, dubbed IS-29e, failed due to a propulsion system fuel leak. Intelsat declared the satellite a total loss in April 2019, later attributing it to either a micrometeoroid strike or solar weather activity.

    What caused IS-33e to break up in orbit remains unclear, however. Intesalt officials did observe that it was using far more fuel than it should be to maintain its orbit shortly after launching eight years ago, shaving off 3.5 years of its 15-year lifetime.

    Boeing produces more leaks than this guy:

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      16
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I was on a Boeing plane the other day that was delayed while we watched a guy with a wrench and a rag trying to stop fuel leaking out of the wing. It wasn’t hugely reassuring.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    76 months ago

    Wouldn’t it be a bit more concerning if it exploded into smaller, yet complete satellites…? Exploding “into pieces” seems downright SOP to me.

  • Echo Dot
    link
    fedilink
    English
    124
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    That’s actually quite impressive because most satellites just don’t do anything when they die. Boeing’s vehicles die with flare, and depressing regularity

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      226 months ago

      That’s only because they’re designed with passivation to vent tanks and disconnect batteries to remove sources of explosion when they start to die. If that fails the tanks eventually pop from thermal cycling or the solar panels overcharge the battery until it blows up like a Russian satellite did earlier this year.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    386 months ago

    Boeing: outsources to an outsourcer who outsources to an outsourcer who outsources to an outsourcer who outsources to an outsourcer and so on and still has the shamelessness of appearing surprised at the shit quality and reliability they deliver

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    156 months ago

    I’m honestly happy to see that it just had a fuel malfunction instead of the implication of an outside cause…

    • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      That was a previous satellite. This one appears to still be unknown if I’m not mistaken.

      Makes me wonder if we have some Kessler Syndrome on our hands… 👀👀👀

      Probably not. Anyway.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      66 months ago

      Yeah, blowing up satellites and cutting undersea internet cables would be (a short) prelude to world war III.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    456 months ago

    This is slightly concerning. Satellites don’t tend to explode on their own, but it is a Boeing design with a history of leaky propulsion, so who knows?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Sure it was a Comm satellite for the world’s tensest area, which is about to go to bigger war.

      who would have ASAT capability at GEO?

      how could it be launched to GEO undetected?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        336 months ago

        If you’re a government, you can pretty much put anything in a rocket fairing and call it a reconnaissance satellite.

        The only warning that actually has to be given is that a rocket is being launched, so you don’t accidentally trigger WW3 by setting off launch detection satellites without warning. After it’s in space, no one can really tell what was in the fairing. Could be a spy satellite, could be navigation. Could just be a box with a bunch of little rockets in it, designed to slam into whatever you want at ridiculous speed.

        But it’s way more likely that this was just Boeing having a tiny leak in a propellant tank, or a bad thruster and as soon as the concentration of propellant and oxidizer got high enough, it triggered a detonation. They certainly have a history of not leak testing their shit: airplanes falling apart, space capsules with leaky thrusters, and now a blown up satellite point more towards incompetence than malice.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        186 months ago

        Is this a trick question? Cause you might as well be asking a 1600s peasant how to develop film.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    136 months ago

    So in addition to the Boeing low hanging fruit - feels like the opener to a scifi story involving either covert space weapons testing or the start to some kind of extraterrestrial invasion. 😁

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    46 months ago

    Boeing evil! Am I right! (laughter)

    It was probably space garbage, and that’s seriously alarming.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      86 months ago

      You should look at some numbers before saying “probably”. It was much less probably space garbage than just Boeing. “Much less probably” here stands for “completely fucking irrelevant”.