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

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

  • superkret@feddit.orgEnglish
    0·
    26 days 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:

    • floofloof@lemmy.caEnglish
      0·
      26 days 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.

  • Zip2@feddit.ukEnglish
    0·
    26 days ago

    Rapid unscheduled disassembly.

    Plus “Into pieces” is rather unnecessary there.

  • lunar17@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    26 days 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?

    • postmateDumbass@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      26 days 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?

      • Zron@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        26 days 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.

  • brucethemoose@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    26 days ago

    …was designed and manufactured by Boeing Space Systems and launched in 2016. It provided broadband services, including internet and phone communication services, to parts of Europe, Africa, and most of Asia.

    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.

    Could be a coincidence, but I feel “Boeing leaks” approaching “Samsung exploding” levels of memification (where they had washers, phones and some other things all exploding, and the look was not great).

    Samsung shook the meme off, but I feel like Boeing will have a harder time.

    • yeather@lemmy.caEnglish
      0·
      26 days ago

      Samsung makes consumer grade products that are “easily” replaced or fixed. Boeing makes shit for the US military, and they will 100% get what’s coming to them when a Boeing military project spontaneously combusts.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
        0·
        26 days ago

        I do sort of feel that Samsung got a bit of a bad rep for their phones exploding because it wasn’t really their fault. The company that made the batteries took shortcuts in the manufacturing process and that’s what caused the fires. If they had followed the instructions Samsung had given them they would have been okay.

        Although equally the company wouldn’t have felt the need to take shortcuts if Samsung had made the batteries to a standard design.

      • LavenderDay3544@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        24 days ago

        Go look up what Samsung started out selling. They make a ton of military shit too just mostly for their own country.

        • yeather@lemmy.caEnglish
          0·
          24 days ago

          Samsung’s military shit did not explode, their main sources of revenue do not involve the military anymore, and the reason for the explosion was identified and resolved.

          Boeing, however, have multiple faults in fields that do deal with the military, this doesn’t end well.

  • kandoh@reddthat.comEnglish
    0·
    25 days ago

    Jack Welch is up there with the guy who invented leaded gasoline and the chemicals that put holes in the ozone.

  • clutchtwopointzero@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    26 days 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