Not a good year to be boeing hardware
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
Banner made by u/Fertility18
We have outer space pretty well mapped, tens of thousands of pieces of space junk are tracked daily, I have a hard time believing you could take out a satellite and have nobody know.
Nah, just Boeing being Boeing.
An estimate from before this satellite broke up was that 97% of space debris is not tracked and that there are 131 million pieces of untracked debris in space.
Now that said, I think your point is valid because most of this untracked debris is much smaller than a satellite
Does debris in the geostationary orbit move relatively to each other and the satellites?
If it's still in geostationary orbit, no. Generally debris aren't in a perfectly defined orbit like that, though.
If it's debris that used to be in geostationary orbit, they're going to be in an array of slightly different orbits, and so will have an epicycle of some kind as seen from the earth.
Also, note that intelligence satellites tend not to be geostationary, because that would limit their collection area. I don't know about this specific one.
I was talking about Intelsat 33e which ~~is~~ was a communication satellite, not for espionage, on a geostationary orbit. The russian espionage satellites Olymp-K and Kosmos 1408 mentioned in the other replies, however are/were on a geosynchronous orbit and on low earth orbit, respectively, as you suggested.
Oh, okay. It's a funny name then.
Its named after the * International Telecommunications Satellite Consortium*
Oh yeah, I think I have heard that name before. (It's organization, though)
Obviously the naming is not consistent among the wikipedia articles in different languages:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelsat_33e