
Satellite disaster averted after SpaceX refuses to move - breitling
https://menafn.com/1098959334/Satellite-disaster-averted-after-SpaceX-refuses-to-move
======
wahern
> ... the risk of collision between the two satellites was 1 in 1,000--ten
> times higher than the threshold that requires a collision avoidance
> maneuver. ....

> As to why SpaceX refused to move their satellite and has avoided comment
> since, is not entirely clear, the report said.

I'll go out on a limb and say that SpaceX refused to move their satellite
because it wouldn't be cost effective to perform avoidance procedures at those
odds when you have thousands of micro-satellites. SpaceX understands that
everybody's risk tolerance will need go up considerably.

That's self-serving, but it's the direction things will need to go for _any_
large deployments. At least SpaceX would be able to send up your replacement
satellite, and do it for free if necessary.

I imagine you do perform avoidance maneuvers at 1:10000 odds because the err
bars are so large. If so, it might be more cost effective long-term to improve
detection and prediction. By being the obnoxious guy who refuses to budge,
SpaceX can induce demand for better technology.

