Which is why a laser-based system is more practical. With almost no atmosphere, the usable distance is way higher, it can recharge from solar energy, and smaller debris takes less energy to de-orbit. The laser ablation generates thrust, pushing the junk into the atmosphere to burn up.
Bigger objects make smaller objects. Smaller objects deorbit faster naturally as the smaller objects experience more drag relative to their mass compared to larger objects.
For anyone interested in this topic, there's a hard sci-fi TV series from the 2000s called _Planetes_ that's about a future where cleaning up space debris has become necessary due to increased space travel. Of course, in that series, the clean up is largely done by hand, in order for human drama to happen, but it's otherwise technically-accurate and was produced in collaboration with space agencies.
@@FlicksofFun84 Sure thing. How it usually goes is a piece of debris is identified and the crew are assigned to recover or deorbit it. They come up with a plan beforehand, this is where you get your technical aspects, things like orbital trajectory of the debris and the like. Then they execute on the plan, usually with some kind of hitch occurring that leads to the raising of stakes. The show is more than just collecting debris though, there's also the human stories of the cast, though it's usually themed around space and space travel. For example, one episode where one of the characters has a meet-cute on the moon, only to be disappointed when he discovers she's MUCH younger than she looks. Due to being born on the moon, she's incredibly tall, but tragically this means she can never visit Earth as her bones would be unable to handle the higher gravity.
I can't believe that they could say something like that. It's like saying that the astronauts don't experience gravity because they are far away from Earth.😂
@@WeedPatch71no it's not, higher gravity for something in orbit just means it goes to a lower orbit and goes faster. Orbits decay because of the air resistance which is present in low earth orbit which constantly slows objects down. If geostationary orbit had as much air resistance as low earth orbit then things would eventually fall back down.
@WeedPatch71 The gravitational force in orbit around the earth is lower the funther away you are, but it isn't the determining factor. If there was no gravitational force, then you would fly off into space. So there is a force pulling those satellites in. To avoid falling back down to earth, they need to be moving. An orbit is just flying forward so fast that as you fall you never hit the ground. Without anything slowing you down, you'd keep in that orbit permanently. But air molecules will bump into a satellite, that slows it down and brings it closer and closer to earth. The strength of gravity only determines how fast you have to be to stay in orbit. It's the air drag which brings things crashing back down by slowing them.
@@rayguile-rb6qi The USA is one of only ~5 countries out of 196 that does NOT use metric. Please don't project your lack of education on the entire planet thank you.
Well I'm not heating and cooling guy I'm not a scientist but I'm a mechanic and I use a tape measure in inches. Oh look at im sandra d. Im a scientist whooop d do.
The giant stuff isn't the biggest problem. It's the little stuff. We need to grab the big before it gets smashed, but there's already a ton of little things that need dealing with as well.
I don’t like the idea of a one-time use space junk collector. I would think it would be expensive and wasteful. Keeping that claw design for larger debris is good but if the satellite had some propulsion to both push the debris down to earth and redirect the satellite to another piece of debris. Then with its last remaining propusion, use that to push itself to earth. This might save resources and money.
indeed. If it was possible to make collection points where the claws could deposit the satellites into those. Maybe it could recycle the materials somehow? That would be neat. Little resource hubs for building stuff in space in the future perhaps?
Although space recycling sounds great; it still requires an infrastructure that can actually process and produce new... space junk. I think the one-time use mechanism would be more useful if it collected multiple debris before self-destructive. Kinda like katamari damacy.
That was my first thought too, but then I figured something like that seems like a *much* harder problem on top of the challenges they're already facing with their current design. I agree that something that could continually grab junk and send it down to Earth would be better, but the claw design here still seems like a good first step that could teach them a lot of valuable lessons for designing a better system down the road.
Agreed, it would be much better if the device would just take away the object's orbital velocity just enough to drop the periapsis into the atmosphere, the gravity and atmosphere will take care of the rest. Then it would move on to another piece of junk. It could be part of a bigger vehicle where it can go back to refuel.
Hi, I am working on the ClearSpace-1 mission at ClearSpace. I can tell you that we are demonstrating technologies with this first mission. Our plan is to off course serve more than one client with each spacecraft.
@@joannecarr6649As a kid growing up in the late 60's and 70's I was totally convinced you could build the whole world replica with an Erector Set, a bunch of lincoln logs and all the legos you could get your hands on. I had the same giggle when I saw the Lego bot she had built. Have fun all.
Hahaha yeah! That is also what I was thinking. Even though they are suppose to launch in 2026, it doesn't seem like they have the plan worked out completely. Perhaps they do and this channel didn't say what it was.
4:25 made it sound like gravity strength and not atmospheric drag was causing decay. Sorry to nitpick, great video as always. Love you Joe. Thank you for making such amazing content
If you want to read/see some fiction around this topic, the manga/anime Planetes is a good example of this subject and other space habitation topics as well.
I believe that is implied by including that bit at @3:53 where she says below 500km, there is enough atmospheric particles to degrade the orbit within a relatively short timespan.
@@Geeksmithing He says it himself at 4:21 "boost itself up to counteract the atmospheric drag", so it is really odd he contradict himself 4 seconds after that.
Individual launches for each piece of junk seems very inefficient. There was something about using lasers to heat up a piece of debris causing it to "thrust" itself into our atmosphere. I wonder what happened to that.
I figure this is something you implement in incremental steps. First you do a successful tentacle mission, then you iterate and improve the design for it to have multiple uses. You add your secondary and tertiary objectives. By the 5th or 6th generation you have a self-sufficient platform that more than makes up for the trial-error-data collections of the first 3 generations.
A solar powered laser "broom" is probably the best way to clean up small debris, but no government is particularly thrilled at the idea of another government launching a space laser that can deorbit satellites.
Yea, this way is for sure not sustainable. As I was watching this an idea came to my mind. To deorbit the junk you need to slow it down. To continue your cleaning mission on another junk you need some deltaV. What if you steal some DeltaV from the 1st junk throwing it back? Efectlivelly you deoribit it and propell youself to next target for free
I wrote a paper on this problem last year and I mentioned a unique way to remove junk without the issue of making contact with the dead satellite. Hanspeter Schaub and his team have been developing a craft that uses electrostatic attraction to slowly drag the satellites out of the way. It’s like a rudimentary tractor beam. Idk if it’ll work but I thought it was a cool idea.
4:25 - Incorrect terminology. Being "slightly higher up" doesn't mean "weaker gravity" which makes it stay in space longer. Even at the highest LEO (2000 km) mentioned in this video, gravity is still over 60% of what you would feel at the Earth's surface. It's that when you're higher, the atmosphere is thinner, which reduces drag. You covered this point literally a few seconds earlier!
I feel like small, articulated, solar-powered ion-thrusters that could attach themselves to a piece of debris, gradually halt any rotation by thrusting opposite the direction of rotation, then thrust in the opposite direction of travel to gradually bleed of inertia, would be a great way to do this. You could launch many on a single mission, use the ion-thrusters to navigate to the object, then attach themselves via any of a number possible means (magnetic, self-curing epoxy, straps, etc.) You'd basically be turning any selected object into a solar-powered spacecraft with tiny-but-sustained thrust. The other idea I had would be essentially a semi-rigid "space parachute," tuned to create drag by either reflecting sunlight or to scoop up occasional air molecule present at those altitudes (or both). The air option would also gradually accumulate air molecules inside the "scoop" of the parachute, too, increasing the mass of the object (by a miniscule amount, but still).
5:28 Hey Joe you said you don't need to say miles because you're using SI units, and while yes that's true if this is an academic paper or something, this isn't just science. It's science communication. Much of your audience is American, we're gonna have a much better idea of what some number means if you put it in the US system on screen as well. And plenty of Canadians use the US system, while lots of brits still use the actual imperial system which is still pretty close.
4:25 no, the force of gravity barely changes if you just climb a few 100s of kilometers, what changes is the density of the atmosphere which leads to a change in drag.
That plus the first thing that happens is you get dragged to a lower orbit, so it takes a long time, all other things being equal, before you get to where the lower satellite starts out. Where b is positive, a+b>a.
Kessler syndrome doesn't get nearly enough attention in pop culture, so I'm very happy for this video! Starlink and similar 1000+ satellite swarm projects get me very concerned. Now that private launch systems are becoming so available, we definitely need more international rules to keep space safe for mankind against dangerous private exploitation.
it's the main plot point of an anime called Planetes, about people who work as space cleanup crew. one of my favourite hard scifi media ever. kessler syndrome also features somewhat prominently in Cowboy Bebop.
Starlink actually thought about these things... They are in LOW low earth orbit so will fall back faster, they have the world's most advanced (apart from ISS) tracking of objects and actively correct for this to avoid hitting stuff, plus they actively de-orbit at the end of life (or in any malfunction).
Most of humanity is like this: "Litter everything and if it becomes a problem, clean it up". I'm of the "avoid garbage in the first place, then there's nothing to clean up" variety. Avoiding trash is always easier and cheaper than cleaning it up. Same in my household. The less I make a mess of my kitchen, the less I have to clean it up. I simply avoid making stuff dirty or having stuff lying around, then I also don't have to constantly clean and tidy up stuff. I remove excess water after showering (quick and easy with a window squeegee), so limestone never builds up in my shower (which is very hard to remove, often requires aggressive cleaning agents and still a lot of scrubbing). I do change socks, underwear and t-shirts daily but I wear the same jeans or pullover a couple of days, so I don't need to wash that often (why not if they are not sweaty or dirty?). I don't eat in my car or allow anyone else to do that, so I don't have to deal with crumbs and fat from fatty fingers. You can waste so much time and money on cleaning up a mess that would have been easy to avoid in the first place. I wish more people had this mindset, also when it comes to our environment. Instead of destroying and then somehow trying to repair, just don't destroy it.
At 10:35 for a moment you looked like Judge Doom, who framed Roger Rabbit. :D Back on topic, I don’t recall this being addressed in the video but once the claw has a hold of some space debris, what does it do with it? Is the claw designed for repeated use or would they have to send out a new claw for every object that needs cleaning up? That’s going to be a whole lot of pieces…
Robot with claw arms = STUPID IDEA It can only grab junk of a very specific size. If it's too big or too small in any direction it totally won't work. Then we'll have even more space junk up there as they bundle though other junk grabbing ideas. It's this is what we're relying on, humanity is doomed. 😔
Let's say this "Tentacle"-satellite works perfectly and can grab objects at any reasonable speed and rotation. 1. Then, how do you prevent creating new "microlitter" when holding mechanically the large litter object? It will hit the tentacles itself and maybe even the body of the cleanup-satellite. I liked the idea with magnets proposed at the end because there would be much less risk of creating new litter. Keep in mind that this microlitter travels extremely fast and can pierce satellites and objects which are in perfect condition. 2. Now the trash is in the tentacle. What next? You first of all have enlarged the surface of the original trash with the Tentacle. Are you going to navigate to Earth's atmosphere to let it burn down? Expensive and not scalable. Are you going to navigate away from Earth into the depths of space? Expensive and again not scalable. So is there are "Garbage Truck for Tentactle Cleaning Satellites" waiting to be filled in space? What's the solution here?
Yeah this is a junk Kickstarter-like idea. But a few things to add to your points: 1. Magnets only work for magnetic materials, so you still have debris in space 2. A solution could be to bring the stuff in a closer orbit or reduce the speed, then release the junk and speed the tentacle module up again. After all being orbit means you are traveling faster around earth than falling.
@@DerUnglaublicheFrank Thank you. 1. is clear. 2. needs a lot of energy if you want to repeat this more often, hence, it will not be scalable. But I guess you are right with your first sentence. :)
The solution to the second point has to be some kind of recycling in orbit. Building new satellites in orbit using materials already up there would save on launch costs for a start. Even if it's simple things like habitat modules for a space station which are basically just cans. Work done by robots or waldos. Waldos are a good suggestion, why train a robot when you can use a human on remote? Is LEO far enough away to make signal lag a problem?
I like how everything in the first 5min is shown and explained as if the debris is static around earth and not flying at thousands of kilometers because if it was static, it would fall to earth. Have fun trying to catch a walnut sized metal object flying at hundreds and thousands of kilometers an hours.
Cool concept but it won't make that much difference sadly. The big stuff is easy to track and maneuver to avoid, and we can take simpler measures like adding dragsails to prevent more large objects (fragmentation sources) from being added. The millions of small fragments are untrackable and you'd never have enough propellant to make a dent in the population with individual rendezvous maneuvers. Laser ablation is the only remotely feasible solution for the small fragments
Collecting big objects is just as important as eliminating small fragments. This will be the great engineering challenge my generation will face and I can't wait for the multiple groups that'll be doing this.
"but the higher an object is in orbit, the weaker gravity's grip" ... well, kind of. But the less atmospheric drag plays the bigger role the higher up you get. Also, solar activity can play a part in that effect as well.
I really hope this project evolves beyond a single-use claw. Picking up the big stuff isn't the way out because the small stuff is the real threat, and beyond just how wasteful it is to fire a rocket for every piece of debris we remove every failure will just compound the problem even more. This may actually be worse than nothing in it's current state.
I'm a little confused. Maybe I missed something. They grab onto the junk with the tentacles but then what? Does it adjust its orbit just enough so that it deorbits and then let's go? Or does it grab on and then they both deorbit? Or something else?
You didn't explain what are they planning to do after it catches the junk, you have mentioned that it will bring it to the ground but how exactly? Will it lower it's orbit so earth gravity will pull it? Quite interested to know.
i think last point is equally important as cleaning space debris, to plan future space missions with full lifespan that doesn't cause this problem in the first place.
I'm not sure this particular plan makes 'economic' sense... I didn't totally grasp the size of one of these robots, but there is going to be a set number (likely small) that you can send up per [expensive] launch, plus then the actual cost of each of these individual robots... Also, are these one time use vehicles? (I got that impression... But didn't actually cover what is happening once the debris is captured).
@4:26 "But higher an object in orbit, the weaker gravity's grip and the longer it will stay in the orbit." This statement is technically correct, but misleading. It should be "But higher an object in orbit, the weaker atmospheric drag, and the longer it will stay in the orbit."
One claw robot is not enough to clean the man made cosmic mess.In fact a giant mother ship of over claw robots may be required in near future in order to clean a huge chunk of space debris.
2:12 Why does this look like a military weapon masquerading as a cleanup space solution? Would the West love to capture intact, some of those advance Chinese and Russian Satellites.
#1 you need to bump push junk into low orbit to burn up #2 Then you need a Large fuel tank to refuel it to do more work it simply cant float about without air fuels to maneuver other objects #3 dodge incoming junk 1 hit your out action also use to bump satelites back into higher orbit 10 yrs more life
Could you use strong magnetism, with controlled variations and amplitude at the ends of its tenticals to slowly and safely bring in the debris to a halt before capturing it? Or is this a silly idea?
The smart Richard lady sounds like my French teacher, I am fascinated by the French English accent, which I think it's cute. I am learning French in my free time starting by listening to some French songs.
I think the biggest threat is the smaller blueberry size pieces that they won't see coming.
Which is why a laser-based system is more practical. With almost no atmosphere, the usable distance is way higher, it can recharge from solar energy, and smaller debris takes less energy to de-orbit. The laser ablation generates thrust, pushing the junk into the atmosphere to burn up.
Bigger objects make smaller objects.
Smaller objects deorbit faster naturally as the smaller objects experience more drag relative to their mass compared to larger objects.
@@akamesama It's the only (remotely) feasible solution for the far more numerous small fragments
The solution is to launch a giant jelly ball, let it orbit for a while to catch all the tiny things, then use the claw to grab it.
@@charliegnugive this man a Nobel prize
For anyone interested in this topic, there's a hard sci-fi TV series from the 2000s called _Planetes_ that's about a future where cleaning up space debris has become necessary due to increased space travel. Of course, in that series, the clean up is largely done by hand, in order for human drama to happen, but it's otherwise technically-accurate and was produced in collaboration with space agencies.
Oooh that's cool! Looking it up, it's an anime based on a manga and had 26 episodes, and it sounds _super_ interesting. Thank you!!
Can you share more about how Planetes portrays the technical aspects of space debris cleanup and how the characters interact during this process?
@@FlicksofFun84 Sure thing. How it usually goes is a piece of debris is identified and the crew are assigned to recover or deorbit it. They come up with a plan beforehand, this is where you get your technical aspects, things like orbital trajectory of the debris and the like. Then they execute on the plan, usually with some kind of hitch occurring that leads to the raising of stakes.
The show is more than just collecting debris though, there's also the human stories of the cast, though it's usually themed around space and space travel. For example, one episode where one of the characters has a meet-cute on the moon, only to be disappointed when he discovers she's MUCH younger than she looks. Due to being born on the moon, she's incredibly tall, but tragically this means she can never visit Earth as her bones would be unable to handle the higher gravity.
yea i have wathed planetes pretty good series for one about space trash collectors
Thank you very much for the recommendation. Looking it up it seems to be from the creator of vinland saga!
4:24 satellites in higher orbits stay up there longer not because gravity is that much weaker, it's because of the huge reduction in air resistance.
I'm glad somebody else pointed it out or I was going to lol
I can't believe that they could say something like that. It's like saying that the astronauts don't experience gravity because they are far away from Earth.😂
It's actually both.
@@WeedPatch71no it's not, higher gravity for something in orbit just means it goes to a lower orbit and goes faster. Orbits decay because of the air resistance which is present in low earth orbit which constantly slows objects down. If geostationary orbit had as much air resistance as low earth orbit then things would eventually fall back down.
@WeedPatch71 The gravitational force in orbit around the earth is lower the funther away you are, but it isn't the determining factor.
If there was no gravitational force, then you would fly off into space. So there is a force pulling those satellites in. To avoid falling back down to earth, they need to be moving. An orbit is just flying forward so fast that as you fall you never hit the ground.
Without anything slowing you down, you'd keep in that orbit permanently. But air molecules will bump into a satellite, that slows it down and brings it closer and closer to earth. The strength of gravity only determines how fast you have to be to stay in orbit. It's the air drag which brings things crashing back down by slowing them.
-Oh...I have to use miles, right?
-No, we are scientist. We use metric
2 seconds later
-A piece of blueberry size....
Yes scientists do use metric because they are very and extremely familiar with these measurements. The average Joe or Jill isn't.
@@rayguile-rb6qi In the U.S.A.*
On the global scale the average person is familiar with metric.
@@rayguile-rb6qi The USA is one of only ~5 countries out of 196 that does NOT use metric.
Please don't project your lack of education on the entire planet thank you.
Well I'm not heating and cooling guy I'm not a scientist but I'm a mechanic and I use a tape measure in inches. Oh look at im sandra d. Im a scientist whooop d do.
@@davidgentz1731 what are you going on about
The mortal fear that Muriel Richard had on their face when they remembered you were American and had to convert to imperial 😂
The giant stuff isn't the biggest problem. It's the little stuff.
We need to grab the big before it gets smashed, but there's already a ton of little things that need dealing with as well.
Aerogel panels as big and wide as they can make them, and a minimal control apparatus to maneuver them where they're needed.
it looks like the 1st place design if you asked a class of 1st graders to all come up with an idea
big stuff becomes small stuff, addressing the big stuff problem addresses the small stuff problem upstream
@@IrishSnwbrdr
You should probably reread my comment, and actually pay attention to what you're reading this time.
The little parts can be pushed towards earth and burn out. A snow pusher
I now have a new phobia of a claw on a long tether coming down from the sky, grabbing me, and pulling me up into space.
The clawwwwww. The claw is our master. The claw chooses who will go and who will stay.
-Jeff Pidgeon
The Claw...
Basically Sovereign from Mass Effect
You just need to have Inspector Gadget and his niece on your side to protect you from Dr. Claw.
Oh god now I fear the claw too
I feel like this is of those things that's get talked about alot, but nothing is done.
#FakeNews
We have a lot of those 😬
Reminds me a bit of the space robots from "Never look up" 😅
"Not my problem", "no market incentives", yada yada
Cuz it doesn't make money.. For now
I don’t like the idea of a one-time use space junk collector. I would think it would be expensive and wasteful. Keeping that claw design for larger debris is good but if the satellite had some propulsion to both push the debris down to earth and redirect the satellite to another piece of debris. Then with its last remaining propusion, use that to push itself to earth. This might save resources and money.
indeed. If it was possible to make collection points where the claws could deposit the satellites into those. Maybe it could recycle the materials somehow?
That would be neat. Little resource hubs for building stuff in space in the future perhaps?
Although space recycling sounds great; it still requires an infrastructure that can actually process and produce new... space junk.
I think the one-time use mechanism would be more useful if it collected multiple debris before self-destructive. Kinda like katamari damacy.
That was my first thought too, but then I figured something like that seems like a *much* harder problem on top of the challenges they're already facing with their current design.
I agree that something that could continually grab junk and send it down to Earth would be better, but the claw design here still seems like a good first step that could teach them a lot of valuable lessons for designing a better system down the road.
Agreed, it would be much better if the device would just take away the object's orbital velocity just enough to drop the periapsis into the atmosphere, the gravity and atmosphere will take care of the rest. Then it would move on to another piece of junk. It could be part of a bigger vehicle where it can go back to refuel.
Hi, I am working on the ClearSpace-1 mission at ClearSpace. I can tell you that we are demonstrating technologies with this first mission. Our plan is to off course serve more than one client with each spacecraft.
I really love that the demonstration claw, clearly seen around 9:40 - 9:45 was built from Lego. 🤣🤣
It would not be able to pick up bolts/pencil size debris.
@@zollen123 LOL, for that maybe a magnet?
@@joannecarr6649 non metallic objects?
@@zollen123 Maybe a reinforced foil sheet, similar to the James Webb sails?
@@joannecarr6649As a kid growing up in the late 60's and 70's I was totally convinced you could build the whole world replica with an Erector Set, a bunch of lincoln logs and all the legos you could get your hands on.
I had the same giggle when I saw the Lego bot she had built.
Have fun all.
5:27 don't worry we're talking science language here, we use the metric. Love it 😂
I am so thankful we have folks who are thinking about this.
Okay they grab it... And then what? Grab more? De-orbit? Throw it to earth. I... Feel like this video missed the information on that part.
Hahaha yeah! That is also what I was thinking. Even though they are suppose to launch in 2026, it doesn't seem like they have the plan worked out completely. Perhaps they do and this channel didn't say what it was.
4:25 made it sound like gravity strength and not atmospheric drag was causing decay. Sorry to nitpick, great video as always. Love you Joe. Thank you for making such amazing content
If you want to read/see some fiction around this topic, the manga/anime Planetes is a good example of this subject and other space habitation topics as well.
YES! I delved into the comments to make the same suggestion.
I was gonna say the same lol.
9:41 can we all just appreciate the wonderful use of LEGOS as a space engineering tool…..
Ah, the Kessler Syndrome.
This deserves a lot of attention.
4:25 gravity’s grip may be insignificantly lighter, but the lower density of atmospheric particles is the cause of longevity in orbit here…
I noticed that too.
I believe that is implied by including that bit at @3:53 where she says below 500km, there is enough atmospheric particles to degrade the orbit within a relatively short timespan.
@@Geeksmithing He says it himself at 4:21 "boost itself up to counteract the atmospheric drag", so it is really odd he contradict himself 4 seconds after that.
Individual launches for each piece of junk seems very inefficient. There was something about using lasers to heat up a piece of debris causing it to "thrust" itself into our atmosphere. I wonder what happened to that.
I figure this is something you implement in incremental steps. First you do a successful tentacle mission, then you iterate and improve the design for it to have multiple uses. You add your secondary and tertiary objectives. By the 5th or 6th generation you have a self-sufficient platform that more than makes up for the trial-error-data collections of the first 3 generations.
A solar powered laser "broom" is probably the best way to clean up small debris,
but no government is particularly thrilled at the idea of another government launching a space laser that can deorbit satellites.
Yea, this way is for sure not sustainable. As I was watching this an idea came to my mind.
To deorbit the junk you need to slow it down. To continue your cleaning mission on another junk you need some deltaV. What if you steal some DeltaV from the 1st junk throwing it back? Efectlivelly you deoribit it and propell youself to next target for free
People are working on the laser deorbit system still... that is a good solution for all the small stuff.
I wrote a paper on this problem last year and I mentioned a unique way to remove junk without the issue of making contact with the dead satellite. Hanspeter Schaub and his team have been developing a craft that uses electrostatic attraction to slowly drag the satellites out of the way. It’s like a rudimentary tractor beam. Idk if it’ll work but I thought it was a cool idea.
paper link?
4:25 - Incorrect terminology. Being "slightly higher up" doesn't mean "weaker gravity" which makes it stay in space longer. Even at the highest LEO (2000 km) mentioned in this video, gravity is still over 60% of what you would feel at the Earth's surface.
It's that when you're higher, the atmosphere is thinner, which reduces drag. You covered this point literally a few seconds earlier!
9:44
„gravity makes all of this harder“
Michael Scott:
*all of this harder
the subtitles "Gravity makes all of us harder."
I feel like small, articulated, solar-powered ion-thrusters that could attach themselves to a piece of debris, gradually halt any rotation by thrusting opposite the direction of rotation, then thrust in the opposite direction of travel to gradually bleed of inertia, would be a great way to do this. You could launch many on a single mission, use the ion-thrusters to navigate to the object, then attach themselves via any of a number possible means (magnetic, self-curing epoxy, straps, etc.) You'd basically be turning any selected object into a solar-powered spacecraft with tiny-but-sustained thrust.
The other idea I had would be essentially a semi-rigid "space parachute," tuned to create drag by either reflecting sunlight or to scoop up occasional air molecule present at those altitudes (or both). The air option would also gradually accumulate air molecules inside the "scoop" of the parachute, too, increasing the mass of the object (by a miniscule amount, but still).
What will they do with the junk after capturing it? Burn it up in the atmosphere, gassing the metals they were made out of?
Probably burn it up in atmo, objects in lower orbits already end their life cycles by being slowed by air drag and falling down.
Exactly, very shallow video
I was waiting for that part too but unfortunately we left with no answers
Using my ksp knowledge, you may grab the satellite then do a retrograde burn and release the satellite. It will fall back down.
@@stephencheung5878 That's a lot fuel. How many times can a claw do this? How many times will it need to?
5:28 Hey Joe you said you don't need to say miles because you're using SI units, and while yes that's true if this is an academic paper or something, this isn't just science. It's science communication. Much of your audience is American, we're gonna have a much better idea of what some number means if you put it in the US system on screen as well. And plenty of Canadians use the US system, while lots of brits still use the actual imperial system which is still pretty close.
4:25 no, the force of gravity barely changes if you just climb a few 100s of kilometers, what changes is the density of the atmosphere which leads to a change in drag.
That plus the first thing that happens is you get dragged to a lower orbit, so it takes a long time, all other things being equal, before you get to where the lower satellite starts out. Where b is positive, a+b>a.
Kessler syndrome doesn't get nearly enough attention in pop culture, so I'm very happy for this video! Starlink and similar 1000+ satellite swarm projects get me very concerned. Now that private launch systems are becoming so available, we definitely need more international rules to keep space safe for mankind against dangerous private exploitation.
it's the main plot point of an anime called Planetes, about people who work as space cleanup crew. one of my favourite hard scifi media ever. kessler syndrome also features somewhat prominently in Cowboy Bebop.
Starlink experiences atmospheric effects and thus would naturally deorbit over time. I don't think those would be the first concern
Starlink actually thought about these things... They are in LOW low earth orbit so will fall back faster, they have the world's most advanced (apart from ISS) tracking of objects and actively correct for this to avoid hitting stuff, plus they actively de-orbit at the end of life (or in any malfunction).
The title reminds me of kurzegsagt and their space videos
Most of humanity is like this: "Litter everything and if it becomes a problem, clean it up". I'm of the "avoid garbage in the first place, then there's nothing to clean up" variety. Avoiding trash is always easier and cheaper than cleaning it up. Same in my household. The less I make a mess of my kitchen, the less I have to clean it up. I simply avoid making stuff dirty or having stuff lying around, then I also don't have to constantly clean and tidy up stuff. I remove excess water after showering (quick and easy with a window squeegee), so limestone never builds up in my shower (which is very hard to remove, often requires aggressive cleaning agents and still a lot of scrubbing). I do change socks, underwear and t-shirts daily but I wear the same jeans or pullover a couple of days, so I don't need to wash that often (why not if they are not sweaty or dirty?). I don't eat in my car or allow anyone else to do that, so I don't have to deal with crumbs and fat from fatty fingers. You can waste so much time and money on cleaning up a mess that would have been easy to avoid in the first place. I wish more people had this mindset, also when it comes to our environment. Instead of destroying and then somehow trying to repair, just don't destroy it.
Congratulations on 5 million!
It would have been nice if u went into how the trash was discarded and who was going to pay for this clean up
Its great to seeing what our client is doing and being part of their journey. Love seeing our animation to help them better tell their story!
At 10:35 for a moment you looked like Judge Doom, who framed Roger Rabbit. :D
Back on topic, I don’t recall this being addressed in the video but once the claw has a hold of some space debris, what does it do with it? Is the claw designed for repeated use or would they have to send out a new claw for every object that needs cleaning up? That’s going to be a whole lot of pieces…
"It's a suicide mission" ☄️
My device might be glitching but how's your comment added 13h ago when the video is uploaded only 15 min ago
@@besmart So it's 1 grabby satellite per piece of junk. That doesn't sound costly at all.
Patreon Early-Access. If a video is set to unlisted and changed to published/public, the upload time gets changed.@@Anonymo09
@@zovisapphire
Huh I posted a comment saying the same thing, idk why it's gone
Robot with claw arms = STUPID IDEA
It can only grab junk of a very specific size. If it's too big or too small in any direction it totally won't work. Then we'll have even more space junk up there as they bundle though other junk grabbing ideas. It's this is what we're relying on, humanity is doomed. 😔
Thanks!
You're welcome!
Let's say this "Tentacle"-satellite works perfectly and can grab objects at any reasonable speed and rotation.
1. Then, how do you prevent creating new "microlitter" when holding mechanically the large litter object? It will hit the tentacles itself and maybe even the body of the cleanup-satellite. I liked the idea with magnets proposed at the end because there would be much less risk of creating new litter. Keep in mind that this microlitter travels extremely fast and can pierce satellites and objects which are in perfect condition.
2. Now the trash is in the tentacle. What next? You first of all have enlarged the surface of the original trash with the Tentacle. Are you going to navigate to Earth's atmosphere to let it burn down? Expensive and not scalable. Are you going to navigate away from Earth into the depths of space? Expensive and again not scalable. So is there are "Garbage Truck for Tentactle Cleaning Satellites" waiting to be filled in space? What's the solution here?
Yeah this is a junk Kickstarter-like idea. But a few things to add to your points:
1. Magnets only work for magnetic materials, so you still have debris in space
2. A solution could be to bring the stuff in a closer orbit or reduce the speed, then release the junk and speed the tentacle module up again. After all being orbit means you are traveling faster around earth than falling.
@@DerUnglaublicheFrank Thank you. 1. is clear. 2. needs a lot of energy if you want to repeat this more often, hence, it will not be scalable. But I guess you are right with your first sentence. :)
The solution to the second point has to be some kind of recycling in orbit. Building new satellites in orbit using materials already up there would save on launch costs for a start. Even if it's simple things like habitat modules for a space station which are basically just cans. Work done by robots or waldos. Waldos are a good suggestion, why train a robot when you can use a human on remote? Is LEO far enough away to make signal lag a problem?
I like how everything in the first 5min is shown and explained as if the debris is static around earth and not flying at thousands of kilometers because if it was static, it would fall to earth.
Have fun trying to catch a walnut sized metal object flying at hundreds and thousands of kilometers an hours.
Cool concept but it won't make that much difference sadly. The big stuff is easy to track and maneuver to avoid, and we can take simpler measures like adding dragsails to prevent more large objects (fragmentation sources) from being added. The millions of small fragments are untrackable and you'd never have enough propellant to make a dent in the population with individual rendezvous maneuvers. Laser ablation is the only remotely feasible solution for the small fragments
4:23 It is not a cause of gravity, but air resistance
All the orbits at 5:00 are impossible.
5:32 "don't worry we are talking science language here ,we use metrics here" this was so good 😂😂😂 finally
As always, another amazing edition but I must confess watching you morph into a 'Toon' was... PRICELESS!!!
Collecting big objects is just as important as eliminating small fragments. This will be the great engineering challenge my generation will face and I can't wait for the multiple groups that'll be doing this.
I was hoping for a description of the mechanism to actually remove the junk from space after grabbing it. Some of those dead satellites weight tons.
What are the cost projections? Who will fund this? What percentage of space junk will this work on?
7:25 idk, space isn't programmed to literally *make* you lose the claw game 😂 but fair point, space makes everything harder
"but the higher an object is in orbit, the weaker gravity's grip" ... well, kind of. But the less atmospheric drag plays the bigger role the higher up you get. Also, solar activity can play a part in that effect as well.
The big question for the giant claw satellite is if they have enough tokens. Also, Mark Rober has shown that those arcade games are essentially scams.
I think I saw something like the claw in the James Bond movie "You Only Live Twice".
5:26 The horror😂😂
Blobs of Aerogel, a hundred meters across, would collect some of the small pieces of space junk and then burn up in the atmosphere!
10:15 We should ask Cooper from Interstellar to pilot it along with TARS... 😂😂
i wonder when they will be putting up the first postings for space junk collector jobs ... it's gonna be lit. :')
Why is there a union jack on the spacecraft? Are they sending the junk to the UK? Good.
That's great for big objects, but it's the ones too small to track that are likely the most deadly.
I really hope this project evolves beyond a single-use claw. Picking up the big stuff isn't the way out because the small stuff is the real threat, and beyond just how wasteful it is to fire a rocket for every piece of debris we remove every failure will just compound the problem even more. This may actually be worse than nothing in it's current state.
Reminds me of "Quark", the 70s era television sci-fi sitcom about a garbage scow whose mission was to clean up space garbage.
Then there's the anime Planetes which is about space garbage cleanup and other things. A show I highly recommend :D
I missed something. Did they say what they will do with the captured space junk?
2:38 thanks for explaining
Yep, this is going to prove indispensable. One hopes that it can be cost-effective, however.
crazy how CG-like their real life model looks like with a little blur and bloom :)
I'm a little confused. Maybe I missed something. They grab onto the junk with the tentacles but then what? Does it adjust its orbit just enough so that it deorbits and then let's go? Or does it grab on and then they both deorbit? Or something else?
2:13, they intend to grab the trash object and then bring it back to Earth.
How they bring it back?@@nerd_alert927
9:44 "Gravity makes all of us harder".
Words of wisdom.
You didn't explain what are they planning to do after it catches the junk, you have mentioned that it will bring it to the ground but how exactly? Will it lower it's orbit so earth gravity will pull it? Quite interested to know.
can i just say i adore the fact they used lego to simulate the catching process? lol (9:29)
THE CLAAAAAAAW! The claw is our master. Claw chooses who will go and who will stay.
Toy story?
@@fsj197811 Yes!!!
Thank you!
Did you try a magnetic claw like they have right now but with suction cups on the claws
This idea also reminds me of the movie Space Sweepers. Released in 2021 highly recommend watching
Hey Joe, I loved meeting you at quiz show, great vid!
i think last point is equally important as cleaning space debris, to plan future space missions with full lifespan that doesn't cause this problem in the first place.
9:40 I love that this demo uses Lego 😀
I've never heard someone say the earth is really big and I love it😂😂
Literally what the anime "Planetes" was about!
Good show!
Watched the whole video waiting to see what the claw does after it catches the debris. Im just gonna assume it impregnates it
I'm not sure this particular plan makes 'economic' sense... I didn't totally grasp the size of one of these robots, but there is going to be a set number (likely small) that you can send up per [expensive] launch, plus then the actual cost of each of these individual robots... Also, are these one time use vehicles? (I got that impression... But didn't actually cover what is happening once the debris is captured).
@4:26 "But higher an object in orbit, the weaker gravity's grip and the longer it will stay in the orbit." This statement is technically correct, but misleading. It should be "But higher an object in orbit, the weaker atmospheric drag, and the longer it will stay in the orbit."
One claw robot is not enough to clean the man made cosmic mess.In fact a giant mother ship of over claw robots may be required in near future in order to clean a huge chunk of space debris.
2:12 Why does this look like a military weapon masquerading as a cleanup space solution? Would the West love to capture intact, some of those advance Chinese and Russian Satellites.
now I really want to see some one try and use that thing like one of those claw machine games trying to win a prize and it just keeps slipping
joe has the lunchtime youtube videos on lock
Great video as always
1:18 why did you ai interpolate that
that just makes it look worse
especially with that many dots
love the Dodgeball ref. ADAA
Ok so what is it going to do with the items it grabs is it going to collect them or put them back into re entry to burn up?
Wow!! Those smart people are amazing 😍
Appreciating your effort🎉🎉
Claw is nice for big pieces. I would like to see a huge fuzzy net or something to try to snag the smaller pieces.
#1 you need to bump push junk into low orbit to burn up #2 Then you need a Large fuel tank to refuel it to do more work
it simply cant float about without air fuels to maneuver other objects #3 dodge incoming junk 1 hit your out action
also use to bump satelites back into higher orbit 10 yrs more life
I want to see a live feed of this mission.
how epic is it that an actual space agency used LEGO to build a small model of their spaceship
Could you use strong magnetism, with controlled variations and amplitude at the ends of its tenticals to slowly and safely bring in the debris to a halt before capturing it? Or is this a silly idea?
I just found you. I subscribed immediately. All good wishes.
I'm your biggest fan ever sir ❤❤😊
is the claw spacejunk legoset aviable or is that a one of a kind set?
The smart Richard lady sounds like my French teacher, I am fascinated by the French English accent, which I think it's cute. I am learning French in my free time starting by listening to some French songs.
Please suggest that this thing is able to be refueled in space
What do they do with the debris they grab? Sling it into the atmosphere for incineration? 🤔
You didn't say what the "grabber" is going to do with it once it has collected a piece of garbage?
Switzerland is known for.....cheese! Appenzeller, Tilsiter, Le Gruyère, Emmentaler, cheese fondue, raclette..... Soooo 😋