Military Review

Orbital Cleaners

28
Orbital Cleaners

"Who owns space, he owns the world."


This phrase, uttered by American President Lyndon B. Johnson in the early 60s, is more relevant today than ever.

Currently, artificial earth satellites (AES) play a crucial role in optical and radar reconnaissance, as well as in providing global digital communications. In the previous articles, we considered the use of space reconnaissance means to detect aircraft carrier and ship strike groups (AUG / KUG)and application of civilian technologies to radically reduce the cost of satellites for active radar reconnaissance.

Let's make a small digression to the topic of reconnaissance satellites. In a recently published article Prospects for radar systems on nanosatellites the possibility of creating satellite constellations of remote sensing based on small-sized satellites - cubesats, with radar stations (radar) operating in the aperture synthesis mode is being considered.

Moreover, only receivers can be installed in the reconnaissance satellites themselves, and existing sources are used as emitters. In particular, transmitters of satellite communication systems can act as sources. At the same time, the more satellite receivers, the less power can be used to work, since the signal from several receivers will be integrated, which will increase the signal-to-noise ratio by the corresponding number of times.

This feature brings us back to SpaseX's Starlink Global Internet Project. Given the number of Starlink satellites, they could well be used as an active part of a network of Earth radar reconnaissance satellites. Moreover, it is not at all excluded that this project will subsequently be taken up by SpaseX itself as part of some conditional StarEye project, implemented in the interests of military and / or civilian users.


In the longer term, they will develop space-to-surface orbital systems capable of striking stationary ground-based, buried protected targets, and later on mobile targets on land, water and in the air.

Orbital Strike Platform Concept

Equally interesting and far more threatening is deployment orbital missile defense systems, potentially capable of intercepting thousands of warheads.

As we mentioned in the previous post, the task of antimissile defense is in many ways similar to the task of destroying enemy spacecraft. And its solution with the help of interceptor missiles is ineffective in terms of cost / effectiveness.

However, there are other ways to destroy enemy spacecraft - this is the use of weapons class "space-space".

Soviet experience


Unlike the United States, which regards anti-missile weapons as a priority weapon, the Soviet Union relied on military satellites.

Since the beginning of the 60s of the XX century, the air defense forces of the USSR began developing the Satellite Fighter (IS) program. And already in 1963, the world's first maneuvering satellite, the Polet-1 spacecraft, was launched into space. And in 1964, the Polyot-2 spacecraft was sent into space.

Spacecraft Polet-1

Spacecraft of the Flight series could change the altitude and inclination of the orbit over a wide range. In theory, the fuel supply allowed them to fly even to the moon.

The Polet series spacecraft were guided to the enemy's satellites from the ground control and measuring control station according to the radar and optical observation points. The IS itself was also equipped with a radar homing head (radar seeker).

Since 1973, the IP system has been accepted for trial operation. The enemy's satellites could be intercepted at altitudes from 100 to 1 kilometers.

Later the satellites were upgraded. An infrared seeker (IR seeker) has been added. The satellites were launched into orbit by Cyclone launch vehicles (LV). The improved anti-satellite system received the designation "IS-M". Until 1982, 20 satellite fighters and a comparable number of target satellites were launched into orbit.

IS-M serial spacecraft

The topic of "satellite fighters" was not abandoned in Russia either. Periodically there is information about "satellites-inspectors" - spacecraft capable of actively maneuvering in space, approaching the enemy satellites for "inspection". Such satellites-inspectors include the spacecraft "Kosmos-2491", "Kosmos-2504", launched in 2013 and 2015, respectively.

The newer is the spacecraft "Kosmos-2519". It is assumed that the Kosmos-2519 spacecraft can be executed on the Karat-200 platform (developed by NPO Lavochkin), capable of operating in orbits up to geostationary.

Image of AES on the Karat-200 platform

In July 2020, the Interfax news agency announced the successful testing of one more satellite inspector. And in January 2020, the Russian satellite-inspector Kosmos-2543 approached the American reconnaissance satellite at a distance of about 150 kilometers. After which the American satellite corrected its orbit.

The tasks to be carried out in orbit by the "inspector satellites" are classified. It is assumed that they can read intelligence information from enemy satellites, jam signals or otherwise interfere with their work. And finally, the very probability of active maneuvering in orbit presupposes the possibility of destroying the enemy's spacecraft by ramming - self-destruction of the "inspector's satellite".

Foreign analogues


Similar systems are being created by our "partners" - the United States and China.

The United States launched two small MiTEX satellites in 2006 for covert approach to objects in geostationary orbit.

Image of the MiTEX satellite with an accelerator

In China, satellite convergence experiments and robotic arm tests were carried out on the Chuang Xin 3 (CX-3), Shiyan 7 (SY-7) and Shijian 15 (SJ-15) vehicles. The official purpose of these spacecraft is space debris removal.

Chuang Xin 3 (CX-3) and Shiyan 7 (SY-7)

In 2010, two Chinese spacecraft SJ-6F and SJ-12 deliberately collided with each other. With a high probability, this was a test for the possibility of their use as a space-to-space weapon.

However, all government projects have one distinctive feature - the products created within their framework are distinguished by an extremely high cost. Considering that promising reconnaissance and communications groups can be built on the basis of much cheaper commercial solutions, this approach is unacceptable.

If the killer satellite costs more than the satellite or spacecraft that it hits, then it will be cheaper to restore the satellite constellation than to destroy it.

One of the options for solving this problem is the use of commercial spacecraft developed for the removal of space debris from orbit to destroy enemy satellites.


Theoretically, the problem of space debris removal itself may well become relevant in connection with the rapid increase in the number of satellites in low orbits, as well as with their unplanned failure with the loss of the possibility of forced deorbiting and / or destruction into small fragments.

Visualization of the increase in debris in orbit from 1957 to 2015.

ClearSpace


The European Space Agency (ESA) is working with start-up company ClearSpace to design a space debris cleaner using four robotic limbs.

It is planned that as part of the first test mission, the ClearSpace-1 spacecraft will lift from orbit an altitude of 600-800 kilometers of the spent stage of the Vega launch vehicle weighing about 100 kilograms.

ClearSpace-1 spacecraft operation scheme

ClearSpace-1 SC presentation

The ClearSpace-1 spacecraft will capture the spent stage with robotic arms, after which it will burn with it in the atmosphere. In the future, more complex missions are planned, in which ClearSpace-1 will try to capture and destroy several pieces of space debris at once.

RemoveDEBRIS


In the British project RemoveDEBRIS, which is being developed by Surrey Satellite Technology and the University of Surrey, it is planned to capture space debris with a network or a harpoon capable of piercing the spacecraft body.

RemoveDEBRIS spacecraft concept

In 2018, the RemoveDEBRIS spacecraft demonstrated the ability to use a network to capture objects. And in 2019, a test shot was fired with a harpoon at a target simulator. The RemoveDEBRIS spacecraft was deployed from the International Space Station (ISS).

It is assumed that the RemoveDEBRIS spacecraft will be able to sequentially collect several objects and bring them out of orbit, burning together with them in the atmosphere.

Astroscale Holdings Inc


The Japanese company Astroscale Holdings Inc., founded in 2013, is developing a project for a maneuvering satellite for space debris removal.

The first experimental launch is to be carried out by the Soyuz LV from the Baikonur cosmodrome in March 2021. An experienced satellite of Astroscale Holdings Inc., measuring 110x60 centimeters and weighing 175 kilograms, will have to collect imitation debris, and then enter the Earth's atmosphere and burn with it.

AES of Astroscale Holdings Inc.

Among civilian, albeit not commercial, spacecraft, one can recall the Japanese probes Hayabusa-1 and Hayabusa-2.

The spacecraft data are intended not for cleaning up space debris, but for approaching asteroids, landing a controlled module on them, extracting soil and its subsequent delivery to Earth.

It should also be noted that the Hayabusa-2 spacecraft was equipped with a Small Carry-on Impactor (SCI) module, which in fact is an ammunition operating on the principle of a "shock core". In essence, Japan has conducted tests of conventional weapons in space - in the future, the "strike core" may well be used for military purposes.

Hayabusa-type spacecraft image

SCI Module and Impact Core Attack Image

conclusions


The topic of commercial spacecraft, developed for the removal of space debris from orbit, is not limited to the above projects.

There are much more startups and projects in this area.

There are similar projects in Russia. However, they are being developed by government agencies - GK Roskosmos, JSC Russian Space Systems. This means that you should not expect a low cost from them. In the best case, developments on them will be in demand in the promising Kosmos satellites.

Infographics on the Russian satellite for the processing and disposal of space debris - the plans are, of course, ambitious.

As with Capella Space's Starlink communications satellites and Earth remote sensing satellites, the military can be expected to be interested in the orbital cleaner projects.

In fact, as part of the creation of orbital cleaners, all technologies are being tested to solve the problems of destroying enemy spacecraft and satellites, including:

- target detection;
- the output of the spacecraft to it;
- maneuvering and approaching the target;
- target firing (capture);
- Destruction of the target by penetration or vault from orbit.

Accordingly, commercial space debris cleaners or maneuvering research probes may well be used as anti-satellite weapons.

The question of price remains.

In general, if we are talking about the vault of space debris from orbit, and not about its recycling (by processing in orbit or by descent to the ground in the shuttle's cargo hold), then these undertakings will not bring profit. You can get a grant, master it by building a spacecraft to remove debris from orbit, but you will hardly be able to commercialize it - there are not many altruists in the West. The task of cleaning the orbit itself is unlikely to be paid by space agencies systematically - for example, one-time orders.

But the military may well be interested in the most interesting projects. And after a little refinement, get effective and inexpensive anti-satellite weapons. Their development, testing and even deployment can be carried out under the slogan of clearing the orbit from space debris.

And in fact, the deployment of space-to-space weapons will be organized?
Author:
Photos used:
pbd.su, topwar.ru, dfnc.ru, habr.com, vpk.name
28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 27 January 2021 04: 14
    +3
    The ClearSpace-1 spacecraft will capture the spent stage with robotic hands, after which it will burn with it in the atmosphere
    Expensive! We need a robotic leg for a robotic pendel with rubbish towards the Earth! laughing Reactive moment will be cheaper to compensate, kmk.
    1. Finches
      Finches 27 January 2021 07: 24
      +1
      Yuri Alekseevich Gagarin was the first to bring weapons into space, and on the personal order of the Chief Designer - our PM! And what is happening in space now, God only knows!
      1. ccsr
        ccsr 27 January 2021 13: 53
        -3
        Quote: Finches
        Yuri Alekseevich Gagarin was the first to bring weapons into space, and by the personal order of the Chief Designer - our PM!

        Well, this is clearly too much - the PM was needed not for space, but after landing in an unknown area.
        Quote: Finches
        And what is happening in space now, God only knows!

        Therefore, the message of the author of the article that we should attend to anti-satellite systems is illogical, if only because he refutes himself:

        However, all government projects have one distinctive feature is that the products created within their framework are distinguished by an extremely high cost. Considering that promising reconnaissance and communications groups can be built on the basis of much cheaper commercial solutions, this approach is unacceptable..

        And his subsequent statement completely contradicts what he stated earlier:
        But the military may well be interested in the most interesting projects. And after a little refinement, get effective and inexpensive anti-satellite weapons. Their development, testing and even deployment can be carried out under the slogan of clearing the orbit from space debris.

        Those. it turns out that the author of the article advises us to engage in a ruinous program with very dubious success, and at the same time not taking into account the experience of the USSR, which for this very reason refused to develop anti-satellite systems.
        In general, the author seems to himself cannot find enough arguments to push his ideas, but he really wants to fantasize about space-to-space weapons, completely not realizing that a large number of enemy satellites will require huge costs when creating such an orbital constellation. We cannot really create an orbital constellation of reconnaissance satellites, and some have already dreamed of fighting in space in the spirit of Star Wars. It's ridiculous, if only because managing our current grouping is already a huge problem, and here it is still unclear what they want to pin on them, and even dubious results in a threatened period.
        1. Shopping Mall
          27 January 2021 14: 32
          +3
          Quote: ccsr
          Quote: Finches
          And what is happening in space now, God only knows!

          Therefore, the message of the author of the article that we should attend to anti-satellites systems is illogical


          It's you again ... My articles haunt you.

          Anti-satellite systems in Russia are made regardless of my or your wishes.

          Quote: ccsr
          if only because he himself refutes himself:

          However, all government projects have one distinctive feature is that the products created within their framework are distinguished by an extremely high cost. Considering that promising reconnaissance and communications groups can be built on the basis of much cheaper commercial solutions, this approach is unacceptable..


          There is just no contradiction here. The road systems developed by the "classic" "large" state-owned companies / corporations / holdings are their drawback. Commercial companies, if they have the opportunity to develop (provided by the state), can offer more effective and daring solutions.

          Quote: ccsr
          And his subsequent statement completely contradicts what he stated earlier:
          But the military may well be interested in the most interesting projects. And after a little refinement, get effective and inexpensive anti-satellite weapons. Their development, testing and even deployment can be carried out under the slogan of clearing the orbit from space debris.


          Get interested in commercial projects, what is the contradiction here? If someone comes up with hiking boots that will surpass the requirements for army ankle boots, and even cost less, why shouldn't the military use them?

          Quote: ccsr
          Those. it turns out that the author of the article advises us to tackle a ruinous program with very dubious success,


          And where did you see this advice?

          Quote: ccsr
          and at the same time not taking into account the experience of the USSR, which for this very reason refused to develop anti-satellite systems.


          Hello, half of the article is about the Soviet project of space-to-space weapons and its Russian ideological heirs, and you say “refused”. The USSR "refused", or rather slowed down when the marked Judas decided to lick the Americans deeper.

          Quote: ccsr
          In general, the author seems to himself cannot find enough arguments to push his ideas, but he really wants to fantasize about space-to-space weapons, completely not realizing that a large number of enemy satellites will require huge costs when creating such an orbital constellation. We cannot really create an orbital constellation of reconnaissance satellites, and some have already dreamed of fighting in space in the spirit of Star Wars. It's ridiculous, if only because managing our current grouping is already a huge problem, and here it is still unclear what they want to pin on them, and even dubious results in a threatened period.


          The problem is that these are not fantasies, but reality. But, unfortunately, this reality does not yet look optimistic for us.

          The fact that we cannot create a normal satellite constellation is not a problem of lack of funding, and not even a problem of a lack of technology, but a problem of a clear understanding of the goals and objectives, and the absence of a sane private space.
          1. ccsr
            ccsr 27 January 2021 19: 26
            -1
            Quote: AVM
            It's you again ... My articles haunt you.

            I am amused by some gems on VO, which are not only put forward by you, but also by some other authors. So don't blame me - either write in such a way that it is not in doubt, or go into sci-fi forecasting.
            Quote: AVM
            Anti-satellite systems in Russia are made regardless of my or your wishes.

            An absolutely amateurish delusion - we can only build what we have money for. Even the USSR was not able to build a missile defense system for at least 3-8 industrial regions of the USSR, which is why they agreed to an agreement with the Americans, who also understood what it would result in.
            Quote: AVM
            There is just no contradiction here. The road systems developed by the "classic" "big" state-owned companies / corporations / holdings are their drawback.

            And they cannot be cheap - intelligence equipment in any type of armed forces is always more expensive than other electronic equipment.
            Quote: AVM
            If someone comes up with hiking boots that will surpass the requirements for army ankle boots, and even cost less, why shouldn't the military use them?

            Well, why haven't they come up with CHEAPEST yet?
            Quote: AVM
            Hello, half of the article is about the Soviet project of space-to-space weapons and its Russian ideological heirs, and you say “refused”. The USSR "refused", or rather slowed down,

            Do not fantasize, because they gave up on this even under Ustinov. As soon as Almaz was shut down, these works were closed (if not earlier), otherwise there would not have been enough money for Buran at all.
            Quote: AVM
            But, unfortunately, this reality does not look optimistic for us yet.

            I just have no illusions about the priorities of offensive and defensive weapons.
            Quote: AVM
            The fact that we cannot create a normal satellite constellation is not a problem of lack of funding, and not even a problem of a lack of technology, but a problem of a clear understanding of the goals and objectives, and the absence of a sane private space.

            This is demagogy - everything depends on the economic and financial capabilities of the country, and not on the wishes of designers and the military. Well, of course, we need a research and production base - without this, it is impossible to start developing something new.
    2. Civil
      Civil 27 January 2021 08: 18
      0
      Whoever owns space can damage the communications of the most likely "partner" in the first place. And in the future, space basing will be a means of gaining air superiority over the theater of operations, as well as creating a "no-fly zone."
  2. Bolt cutter
    Bolt cutter 27 January 2021 04: 37
    +6
    already in 1963, the world's first maneuvering satellite was launched into space
    Good galoshes in the Soviet Union made yes
  3. Thrifty
    Thrifty 27 January 2021 05: 02
    +1
    Andrey, how can you check the de facto presence of weapons in orbit now? Honestly, it is not on board from the USA, NATO countries, the Chinese are no more than an empty phrase! Satellite inspection is basically taking off the parameters of its radiation, to determine the equipment used, and visual inspection and photography, but any weapon can be cleverly disguised and not activated for the time being. So, it remains only naive to think that there are allegedly no weapons in orbit. ..
    1. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 27 January 2021 06: 10
      +2
      Quote: Thrifty
      how can you check the de facto presence of weapons in orbit now?

      Yes way.
      Moreover, any satellite itself is already a weapon. In the most primitive case, it can deliberately collide with another device and destroy it or fall to Earth in a given area and cause damage.
      1. Mikhail m
        Mikhail m 27 January 2021 06: 37
        +2
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        he may intentionally collide with another vehicle and destroy it

        The task is not as simple as it seems. A satellite is not a car that can steer wherever the driver wants. Changing the orbit is a very energy intensive task. Space speeds in the literal sense. The target can also maneuver.
  4. Maki maki
    Maki maki 27 January 2021 07: 28
    +13
    The topic is really relevant. Cheburashka was right: "All unnecessary for scrap, we will collect scrap metal!" And there potentially "alien" technologies, rare materials, etc.
    Thanks for the review. good
  5. avaks111
    avaks111 27 January 2021 08: 39
    0
    Reaching the moon is it serious?
    Was the proximity to the American satellite of 150 km critical for the latter?
  6. evgen1221
    evgen1221 27 January 2021 13: 06
    -1
    That's how they push all kinds of deadly rubbish into space, and modern civilization will die. And the survivors will be afraid to use electricity, because thunder from the sky will come from an autonomous station with AI on board and will smash the inventor and a couple of three kilometers in the vicinity into atoms.
  7. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 27 January 2021 13: 53
    0
    "Given the number of Starlink satellites, they may well be used as an active part of a network of reconnaissance satellites for radar sensing of the Earth" ///
    ----
    The Pentagon offered Musk - he refused. Starink - only peaceful companions.
    But a tender came out for a separate network of reconnaissance satellites. Musk participates in it.
    1. Shopping Mall
      27 January 2021 14: 20
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      "Given the number of Starlink satellites, they may well be used as an active part of a network of reconnaissance satellites for radar sensing of the Earth" ///
      ----
      The Pentagon offered Musk - he refused. Starink - only peaceful companions.
      But a tender came out for a separate network of reconnaissance satellites. Musk participates in it.


      It seems that the US military is planning to use Starlink's communications capabilities.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 27 January 2021 14: 54
        +2
        Musk is afraid of getting bogged down with the Pentagon in a semi-military project. All sorts of international treaties, restrictions will begin, and Musk will get involved financially.
        But the Pentagon liked his experience in simultaneously throwing 60-100 satellites into orbits, each with a kitchen table the size of.
        And tenders with the Pentagon began.
        But Musk stipulates that he does not bear any responsibility for these satellites after the launch.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 27 January 2021 18: 03
          0
          But just for some reason, Musk, striving for Mars, does not use his Falcon Heyvey to deliver to Mars everything that is needed now for future manned missions - in fact, he will have to build launching pads on Mars for the production of methane and oxygen and landing sites with all the necessary infrastructure - so his rockets would have sent 16 tons of payload there every month and at the end of the work on the creation of the Starship everything would be ready for a manned launch, but for some reason nothing of this is observed.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 27 January 2021 20: 04
            +2
            Musk has several space projects developing in parallel.
            The Starlink project is predicted to bring him about one hundred billion dollars.
            Part of this money will be invested in the project of flights to Mars.
        2. ccsr
          ccsr 27 January 2021 19: 34
          -1
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Musk is afraid of getting bogged down with the Pentagon in a semi-military project. All sorts of international treaties, restrictions will begin, and Musk will get involved financially.

          Well, do not make this up, because if Musk signs a contract with the Pentagon, he will deeply give a damn about all international problems, since in this case, the State Department will dodge, not Musk.
          Quote: voyaka uh
          But the Pentagon liked his experience in simultaneously throwing 60-100 satellites into orbits, each with a kitchen table the size of.

          Naturally, if it is cheap and reliable. But how to dissolve a hundred exactly in orbits, did Musk accidentally report? This is a problem even for a small number of satellites from one carrier, which is why this ease with a hundred comes from.
          Quote: voyaka uh
          But Musk stipulates that he does not bear any responsibility for these satellites after the launch.

          And the Pentagon will agree to this - well, well ...
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 27 January 2021 19: 59
            +3
            "But how to dissolve a hundred exactly in orbits, did Musk accidentally report?" ///
            ---
            They have successfully orbited 17 portions (17 launches)
            60 pieces each.
            More than 1000 StarLink satellites in operation
            1. ccsr
              ccsr 27 January 2021 20: 10
              0
              Quote: voyaka uh
              They have successfully orbited 17 portions (17 launches)
              60 pieces each.

              And do you believe that all of their satellites have dispersed in their planned orbits? Come on, not everyone believes in Musk's PR campaigns, as well as the fact that his company is one of the most expensive in the world, judging by the market value of the shares.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 27 January 2021 20: 17
                +3
                Not all. Approximately 20 satellites (for the entire time) did not start working normally,
                and they were launched from orbits to self-destruct.
                The network is already working in "beta" mode on several zones.
                Internet power is very high.
                1. ccsr
                  ccsr 27 January 2021 20: 56
                  -3
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  Internet power is very high.

                  I use two television systems in different places - one satellite, "Three color" for 250 channels, and the other through an Internet provider in a package of up to 100 Mbit / s for about the same number of channels.
                  And here's what I will tell you over eight years of operation - weather conditions greatly affect the quality of satellite television, especially in HD format. Do you think this will not affect satellite Internet lines? So far I have made a conclusion for myself - I will not communicate with satellite systems anymore, fiber-optic lines are enough for me.
                2. Shopping Mall
                  27 January 2021 22: 37
                  +1
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  Not all. Approximately 20 satellites (for the entire time) did not start working normally,
                  and they were launched from orbits to self-destruct.
                  The network is already working in "beta" mode on several zones.
                  Internet power is very high.


                  Don't try, it's useless. Not to convince in any way. Some even manage to deny the landing of the steps - that was not the case and that was all.
  8. lopvlad
    lopvlad 27 January 2021 19: 42
    0
    Equally interesting and far more threatening is the deployment of orbital missile defense systems, potentially capable of intercepting thousands of warheads.


    at the moment, we can safely say that it is impossible to deploy or deploy such systems in orbit unnoticed by a hypothetical enemy. Such a system will instantly be taken to accompany and, roughly speaking, the sight of ground and air systems (aircraft with anti-satellite missiles) of a potential enemy. So thousands of ICBM warheads are like that. the system will be able to intercept only theoretically if no one opposes it, but in reality it will be destroyed before ICBMs begin to plow space towards a potential enemy.
    At the moment, in the Earth's orbit, everything that is larger than the size of a tennis ball is confidently identified and taken for accompaniment.
  9. Dmitry V.
    Dmitry V. 23 March 2021 12: 49
    0
    It is assumed that the RemoveDEBRIS spacecraft will be able to sequentially collect several objects and bring them out of orbit, burning together with them in the atmosphere.

    A very ill-conceived concept - to de-orbit the "garbage" that was put into it at such huge costs. Moreover, it is ill-considered squared to use a kamikaze satellite to remove "debris from orbit!"

    It seems more reasonable to use satellites that will collect debris in orbit into more compact clusters for future processing. Store small ones in nets, connect large ones with ties such as cable ties. Energetically, it is more profitable and optimal than to slow down this debris in orbit and introduce it into the dense layers of the atmosphere.
    It is much easier to control the trajectories of such "garbage" clusters. Accordingly, the satellite is a garbage collector, you need to make it refuelable and send a tanker to it for refueling, which it would be advisable to equip with containers for several refueling, after which it will take its place in the nearest garbage cluster.
    The reusable garbage collector will allow you to clean up the orbital sectors more cheaply and efficiently.
    In the future, recycling of "garbage" clusters will be in demand.
    Still, a spent stage or satellite is a stock of high-quality materials in orbit.
    A satellite with a two-roll grinder is generally a creator of small space debris, because it is not realistic to ensure 100% capture of crushed material in zero gravity.
  10. kig
    kig April 7 2021 10: 01
    0
    The idea is not new
  11. Private SA
    Private SA April 10 2021 01: 21
    +1
    And you do not know what the loss of the Gran 'satellite from the parabolic ray zone is
    antenna hardware "Crystal"? Loss of long-distance communications of the KDVO district.
    renamed differently. Relays and long-wave lines did not pull.