saveanon12Starlink lost another 43 satellites last night. Over 300 satellites have burned up since July 16th. NOAA has 3 job openings for space forecaster.
originaluciferhow many does he have to lose before the whole thing isnt worth it?
FaceDeerMore 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.
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 these alongside paying customer payloads.
Starlink is FAR from the only thing they launch. A customer pays for a payload, and any volume or mass left over in the launch is filled with small starkink sats.
They have basically $0 on launch costs because of this. They just toss them in when they have someone else paying for the rocket.
NeilDo you have a source for your claims, or did this just sound good in your head so you’re presenting it as fact?
Here’s a source that debunks that claim. This has a picture of the cargo bay for a starlink flight - she full, and full only of their satellites. spaceflightnow.com/…/next-spacex-launch-to-deploy…
Expected as much. I doubt they will ever respond to me. Liars never do.
[Not OP]
I have not followed space launches in a few years, but in the past they did carry multiple payloads, in what they call “rideshare” launches. Some times, even with confidential cargo where the release of the main mission payload would be 40 minutes later offstream. But I have no clue of the frequency of those.
The wikipedia page indicates some of those launches en.wikipedia.org/…/List_of_Starlink_and_Starshiel…
