zlacker

[return to "Stargaze: SpaceX's Space Situational Awareness System"]
1. pjscot+be[view] [source] 2026-01-30 05:53:55
>>hnburn+(OP)
Honestly, these two paragraphs are one of the most compelling things they could possibly say in a press release:

> Stargaze already has a proven track record in its utility for space safety. In late 2025, a Starlink satellite encountered a conjunction with a third-party satellite that was performing maneuvers, but whose operator was not sharing ephemeris. Until five hours before the conjunction, the close approach was anticipated to be ~9,000 meters—considered a safe miss-distance with zero probability of collision. With just five hours to go, the third-party satellite performed a maneuver which changed its trajectory and collapsed the anticipated miss distance to just ~60 meters. Stargaze quickly detected this maneuver and published an updated trajectory to the screening platform, generating new CDMs which were immediately distributed to relevant satellites. Ultimately, the Starlink satellite was able to react within an hour of the maneuver being detected, planning an avoidance maneuver to reduce collision risk back down to zero.

> With so little time to react, this would not have been possible by relying on legacy radar systems or high-latency conjunction screening processes. If observations of the third-party satellite were less frequent, conjunction screening took longer, or the reaction required human approval, such an event might not have been successfully mitigated.

Looks like a non-trivial upgrade to previous systems, and they're making Stargaze's data available to other satellite operators free of charge. Nice!

◧◩
2. Coeur+ZI[view] [source] 2026-01-30 10:54:52
>>pjscot+be
Now I would really love to know who the other operator was.
◧◩◪
3. jacque+LJ[view] [source] 2026-01-30 11:00:26
>>Coeur+ZI
And what the goal of that maneuver was.
◧◩◪◨
4. phkahl+ac1[view] [source] 2026-01-30 14:21:37
>>jacque+LJ
It seems like it deliberately came close to the Starlink sat, but the "why" is still a good question.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. bell-c+5e1[view] [source] 2026-01-30 14:30:38
>>phkahl+ac1
A test of SpaceX's awareness & response would be ample reason.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. notaha+2F1[view] [source] 2026-01-30 16:37:15
>>bell-c+5e1
If so, SpaceX's longer term response being "here's our SSA data for everyone and here's how we source it" is a good one for all parties involved (even more so for SpaceX and govt customers they share it with if they have other capabilities...)
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. bell-c+942[view] [source] 2026-01-30 18:32:49
>>notaha+2F1
Speculation:

SpaceX has considerably better data than what they disclose, and offer free of charge.

The USSF enjoys full access to that better data, for $[TOP_SECRET]/month.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. notaha+9L2[view] [source] 2026-01-30 22:19:13
>>bell-c+942
Well we already know Starshield (the military version) has specialist space domain awareness capabilities that aren't being shared, and it's entirely plausible that data from regular Starlink sensors/receivers (other than the disclosed star trackers) can be fused into something useful by SpaceX and/or the Space Force.
[go to top]