Intelsat's Boeing-made satellite breaks up in space, disrupting communication services

[zohaibahd]

What just happened? Space junk just got a major addition in the wake of a satellite disintegration. Intelsat's 33e communications satellite has shattered apart while orbiting at geostationary altitude, raising concerns about orbital debris and service disruptions.

The spacecraft, built by the embattled aerospace giant Boeing, encountered major issues over this past weekend, according to Intelsat. On Saturday, the company revealed the satellite experienced an "anomaly" that knocked it offline. On Monday, Intelsat declared it a total loss after it broke apart.

Intelsat 33e had been providing broadband and other communications services across Europe, Africa, and parts of Asia Pacific. Now, the company says that those customers are being transitioned to other satellites in its fleet or third-party spacecraft.

The US military, which tracks space junk, reported spotting around 20 pieces of debris associated with the satellite's breakup as of last Friday. The Space Force's space tracking outfit stated it was conducting routine assessments to ensure no immediate threats to other spacecraft from the fresh orbital shrapnel.

Beyond the service disruptions, the incident is a financial hit for Intelsat. The satellite wasn't even insured at the time of its demise, making this a total write-off.

The 33e spacecraft was the second of Intelsat's EpicNG high-throughput satellites. Its life had already been shortened by around 3.5 years down from its initial lifespan of 15 years due to a propulsion issue discovered during testing after its launch in August 2016.

The first of these satellites, the Intelsat-29e, was already declared a total loss back in 2019 following just three years in orbit. The failure was attributed to either a meteoroid impact or a wiring defect that caused an electrostatic discharge during heightened solar weather activity.

The loss adds to the struggles piling up for manufacturer Boeing, which has been wrestling with operational issues, including a strike hobbling production of its commercial airplanes. Deliveries of the Boeing 777X plane, which was supposed to turn things around for the company, have once again been postponed to 2026.

Boeing's Starliner crew capsule intended for NASA flights has also been delayed by various technical problems and errors, leaving two astronauts stranded aboard the ISS with no fixed return date.

Image credit: Intelsat

Permalink to story:

Intelsat's Boeing-made satellite breaks up in space, disrupting communication services

 

[Dreadcthulhu]

With launch costs declining so much we should be moving away from putting satellites in high orbits where debris from mishaps could potentially cause issues for centuries. Swarms of satellites in LEO can largely do the same job now, and if something happens to them the debris falls out of orbit in a few years.

 

[Kirby1]

With launch costs declining so much we should be moving away from putting satellites in high orbits where debris from mishaps could potentially cause issues for centuries. Swarms of satellites in LEO can largely do the same job now, and if something happens to them the debris falls out of orbit in a few years.

Geo-sync satellites are not an issue as far as debris goes. They're much further out and they don't move relative to earth, so there nothing to worry about.

Space debris is only an issue for LEO satellite.

 

[ScottSoapbox]

At this point, I’m beginning to wonder if Boeing is being targeted...

Just kidding, never underestimate the power of giant blundering bureaucracy that believes it can never fail.

 

[Kotters]

Geo-sync satellites are not an issue as far as debris goes. They're much further out and they don't move relative to earth, so there nothing to worry about.

Space debris is only an issue for LEO satellite.

Debris in geosync is an issue for geosync, which is extremely limited and in high demand.

 

[Kirby1]

Debris in geosync is an issue for geosync, which is extremely limited and in high demand.

Untrue. Geosync orbits are much further out and therefore they have much more space and availability. I think you are getting mixed up.

We put satellites into geosync orbits to retire them because debris is not an issue there.

 

[WhoCaresAnymore]

DEI Hiring strikes again. Nobody should be hired on race/gender. Should be 100% skills/qualifications.

 

[Kirby1]

DEI Hiring strikes again. Nobody should be hired on race/gender. Should be 100% skills/qualifications.

What? Are you a Russian bot account? None if this has anything to do with DEI issues. Your comment is clearly aimed at rage baiting a political issue, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at all.

 

[OortCloud]

Wow, could Boeing's reputation get any worse? What a shambles.

 

[Godel]

According to Wikipedia the satellite was launched just over 8 years ago, so it's probably not a victim of Boeing's recent troubles.

 

[Kotters]

Untrue. Geosync orbits are much further out and therefore they have much more space and availability. I think you are getting mixed up.

We put satellites into geosync orbits to retire them because debris is not an issue there.

We do not put them in geosync for retirement, we move them up into graveyard orbits to open the slot and avoid poisoning the orbit with debris as the satellite ages and potentially explodes.

You have no idea what you're talking about. You even seem to think there's more than one geosync orbit. Geosync is synchronous with the earth's rotation. It's a fixed altitude on the equatorial plane. Any deviation is not geosynchronous by definition.

 

[ZedRM]

Your comment is clearly aimed at rage baiting a political issue, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at all.

No more or less so that some of the statements of the above article. That was likely their point, if a bit subtle. You might have missed that.

 

[Kirby1]

We do not put them in geosync for retirement, we move them up into graveyard orbits to open the slot and avoid poisoning the orbit with debris as the satellite ages and potentially explodes.

You have no idea what you're talking about. You even seem to think there's more than one geosync orbit. Geosync is synchronous with the earth's rotation. It's a fixed altitude on the equatorial plane. Any deviation is not geosynchronous by definition.

Where did I say anything about more than one geosync orbit?

I know exactly what I'm talking about. You are making things up in your head.

What is the difference in your mind between putting satellites into a retirement orbit vs a graveyard orbit?

It's as if you can't even read.

 

[Kirby1]

We do not put them in geosync for retirement, we move them up into graveyard orbits to open the slot and avoid poisoning the orbit with debris as the satellite ages and potentially explodes.

You have no idea what you're talking about. You even seem to think there's more than one geosync orbit. Geosync is synchronous with the earth's rotation. It's a fixed altitude on the equatorial plane. Any deviation is not geosynchronous by definition.

Where did I say anything about more than one geosync orbit?

I know exactly what I'm talking about. You are making things up in your head.

What is the difference in your mind between putting satellites into a retirement orbit vs a graveyard orbit?

It's as if you can't read.

No more or less so that some of the statements of the above article. That was likely their point, if a bit subtle. You might have missed that.

No. I didn't miss anything about DEI issues because there's nothing in the article to miss.

Go ahead and quote the part of the article you think mentions DEI issues.

 

[Kotters]

Where did I say anything about more than one geosync orbit?

I know exactly what I'm talking about. You are making things up in your head.

What is the difference in your mind between putting satellites into a retirement orbit vs a graveyard orbit?

It's as if you can't even read.

Making things up? You're the one who used plurals.

"Geosync orbits are"
"We put satellites into geosync orbits to retire them"

How can you accuse me of not reading when you can't even read your own posts? I never said retirement orbits and graveyard orbits are different. You stated geosync and graveyard orbits are the same. Graveyard orbits are higher than geosync, and used to clear the geosync orbit so those slots can be reused.

"We put satellites into geosync orbits to retire them because debris is not an issue there."

Seriously. Educate yourself before saying nonsense. Even AI would produce more accurate responses. You're not fooling anyone.

 

[Kirby1]

Making things up? You're the one who used plurals.

"Geosync orbits are"
"We put satellites into geosync orbits to retire them"

How can you accuse me of not reading when you can't even read your own posts? I never said retirement orbits and graveyard orbits are different. You stated geosync and graveyard orbits are the same. Graveyard orbits are higher than geosync, and used to clear the geosync orbit so those slots can be reused.

"We put satellites into geosync orbits to retire them because debris is not an issue there."

Seriously. Educate yourself before saying nonsense. Even AI would produce more accurate responses. You're not fooling anyone.

OK sure, technically graveyard orbits are further out than geo.

But the point is that debris is not an issue for geo orbits, and graveyard orbits are irrelevant to that point.

Debris is only an issue for LEO orbits.

Your focusing on semantics instead of the actual point. Get over yourself. If I wanted to focus on semantics, I could point out that actually there are different geosync orbits, and there are geosync graveyard orbits as well as non geosync graveyard orbits, so really I haven't said anything wrong at all.

Educate yourself:

Supersynchronous orbit - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Kotters]

OK sure, technically graveyard orbits are further out than geo.

But the point is that debris is not an issue for geo orbits, and graveyard orbits are irrelevant to that point.

Debris is only an issue for LEO orbits.

Your focusing on semantics instead of the actual point. Get over yourself. If I wanted to focus on semantics, I could point out that actually there are different geosync orbits, and there are geosync graveyard orbits as well as non geosync graveyard orbits, so really I haven't said anything wrong at all.

Educate yourself:

Supersynchronous orbit - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Debris is an issue for geosync, as it is for all orbits. You have yet to provide evidence to the contrary, while I have shown processes and even regulatory requirements that are designed to mitigate issues with debris in geosync. The FAA _requires_ deorbit or boosting to a graveyard orbit to launch into geosync slots for US operators now.

The only person here focusing on semantics is you; it's fairly obvious we're discussing geostationary orbit, as that was the orbit this satellite was in.

 

[Kirby1]

Debris is an issue for geosync, as it is for all orbits. You have yet to provide evidence to the contrary, while I have shown processes and even regulatory requirements that are designed to mitigate issues with debris in geosync. The FAA _requires_ deorbit or boosting to a graveyard orbit to launch into geosync slots for US operators now.

The only person here focusing on semantics is you; it's fairly obvious we're discussing geostationary orbit, as that was the orbit this satellite was in.

I did already state why actually.

Debris is not and issues for geosync orbits because in geo, stuff doesn't move much relative to each other. It's just that simple.

It's obviously still not a good thing, but it's not really an issue.

LEO satellites pass by each other all the time. Geosync satellites do not.

 

[BobHome]

About time to turn the anime series "Planetes" into reality?

 

[toooooot]

Boeing keeps doing it. How long can they do this before their value goes to 0?

 

[toooooot]

DEI Hiring strikes again. Nobody should be hired on race/gender. Should be 100% skills/qualifications.

I think the biggest issue is not even DEI hiring practices. I think the biggest issue is when these people work for a while and others forget how and why they got hired. So when the time for promotion comes, a person who is simply not fit to do the job gets it and starts destroying the company because they were supposed to have their imaginary job that would not give them chances to screw the company.