top of page

Debris Removal

Optical Measurement

NASA

Researchers using NASA’s LEGEND debris model found that even without launching any new spacecraft, collisions among existing objects would generate more debris faster than natural processes like atmospheric drag could remove it. This shows that merely avoiding new debris isn’t enough to secure long-term orbital stability.

​

2005 study by LEGEND:

  1. LEGEND stands for the LEO-to-GEO Environment Debris model. It is an advanced numerical simulation tool developed by NASA’s Orbital Debris Program Office that predicts both the past and future behavior of the orbital debris environment around Earth. 

  2. LEGEND reconstructs the debris environment from the start of the space age (around 1957) up to the present. It does this by adding objects from actual launch records (satellites, rocket bodies, mission-released hardware) and simulating known breakup events to create debris fragments down to about 1 mm in size.

  3. The model uses Monte Carlo simulation methods — essentially many randomized “what-if” runs — to forecast how debris populations might evolve over time under different scenarios, including future launches and possible breakups. It uses a pair-wise collision probability algorithm to capture how objects might encounter and fragment in orbit as debris levels change.

  4. Three-Dimensional: Unlike some earlier debris models (like EVOLVE, which used simpler one-dimensional descriptions by altitude), LEGEND tracks debris in three dimensions (altitude, latitude, longitude) to better represent spatial variations in debris density and movement.

​

How it works:

​

  1. It combines multiple source processes (launch traffic, mission-related releases, breakup fragments) and sink processes (natural orbital decay and atmospheric drag) to simulate debris over time.

  2. In the historical part, the model uses actual launch and breakup data to “replay” how the debris environment developed.

  3. For the future projection, LEGEND performs repeated Monte Carlo runs with statistically sampled collision and explosion events to see how debris populations might grow or shrink under different assumptions.

​

Challenges: technical feasibility, the technology must be capable of safely removing debris from LOE; economic affordability, cost must be reasonable relative to the benefits; political and international acceptance, because shared is shared globally, debris removal must be coordinated in ways acceptable to multiple nations; activities must also avoid creating hazards on earth, such as debris surviving and reentry that could threaten people or property.

​

Debris remediation by re-entry:

“Debris reentry” refers to the return of human-made space objects from orbit back into Earth’s atmosphere. These objects can include defunct satellites, upper stages of rockets, and fragments from breakups. The reentry can happen:

​

  • Uncontrolled: orbit decays over time due to atmospheric drag,

​

  • Controlled: the spacecraft is deliberately steered into a specific path toward the atmosphere. 

​

As orbital debris and defunct spacecraft accumulate, space agencies use reentry as a form of end-of-life disposal to remove objects from orbit and reduce collision risk. However, bringing an object back through the atmosphere involves structural breakup and heating, which affects whether pieces survive to reach the ground. 

Natural (Uncontrolled) reentry

​

  • Over time, atmospheric drag lowers a spacecraft’s orbit until it reenters the atmosphere.

​

  • Because this process isn’t steered, the location where fragments might reach Earth cannot be precisely controlled. 

​

Controlled reentry

​

  • With active propulsion, spacecraft can target a specific reentry path so that surviving debris will fall in uninhabited areas (e.g., remote ocean regions).

​

  • This is often done for large spacecraft that otherwise could pose more risk to people or property if debris landed in populated areas.

Space X (Starlink)

Unlike many operators who meet only the minimum, SpaceX’s planning and mitigation proposals are designed to exceed these standards. The company has integrated NASA’s best practices, including the Spacecraft Conjunction Assessment and Collision Avoidance Best Practices Handbook, into its operational protocols. SpaceX also collaborates with NASA to refine re‑entry prediction models using tools such as NASA’s Object Reentry Survival Analysis Tool (ORSAT)

​

-Demisability

​

  1. Starlink satellites are engineered so that they break up and burn completely during atmospheric reentry, a design concept known as demisability. This dramatically reduces the likelihood that sizable components will survive descent and pose both Earth‑surface and orbital risks.

​

-Targeted Reentry

​

  1. SpaceX actively maneuvers satellites at end of life into controlled deorbit trajectories aimed over remote ocean regions, minimizing any risk to populated areas or busy airspaces. Their tracking systems can forecast reentry points with impressive accuracy, reportedly reducing uncertainty to approximately 10% of an orbit’s ground track.

​

However, tests and real‑world observations have shown that a small fraction of satellite mass (around 5% in some newer designs)—often materials like silicon from solar arrays—can survive reentry in fragmented, low‑energy form. SpaceX is studying these outcomes to continuously improve demisability. In one documented case in 2024, a small Starlink component reached the ground in Canada despite predictions of full disintegration. 

​

While SpaceX does not currently deploy dedicated active debris removal (ADR) technologies, the company’s emphasis on preventing new debris through design, operations, and autonomous collision mitigation is foundational. Its practices are shaping emerging best practices for industry, particularly in the context of mega‑constellations.

​

SpaceX also participates indirectly in international cooperation on space safety by sharing data and promoting transparent situational awareness, helping drive standards for large satellite constellations. As launch rates have increased significantly, cooperative frameworks and shared tracking data will be essential to safely scaling space traffic.

Japan (JAXA)

-ADRAS‑J (Active Debris Removal by Astroscale‑Japan) is a commercial debris inspection demonstration satellite developed by Astroscale Japan Inc. under Japan’s JAXA Commercial Removal of Debris Demonstration (CRD2) program. Its goal is to develop and prove technologies for approaching, inspecting, and eventually helping remove large pieces of space debris, in this case, a derelict upper stage rocket body orbiting Earth. 

​

-ADRAS‑J performed rendezvous and proximity operations with its target, a non‑cooperative piece of orbital debris — the upper stage of a Japanese rocket ~11 meters long, ~4 meters in diameter, and ~3 tons in mass. This is significant because the object has no cooperative navigation aids or active controls, making automated approaches technically challenging.

​

-Technology:

​

  1. ADRAS‑J used LiDAR sensors (pulsed laser light) and custom navigation algorithms for precise spatial awareness and control relative to the debris, key for free‑flying inspection without physical docking. 

General

Passive techniques

-Drag‑Augmented Sails (DAS): Extendable surface elements that increase atmospheric drag on small satellites, accelerating orbital decay to reduce long‑term risk.

​

-Active Debris Removal CONCEPTS

​

-Laser Orbital Debris Removal: Uses ground or space‑based lasers to impart momentum changes to small debris fragments, lowering them for atmospheric reentry.

​

-Net and Harpoon Capture Systems: Physical capture mechanisms designed to grapple larger defunct satellites or rocket bodies and alter their orbits for disposal

​

-Key barriers to ADR deployment:

​

  1. High Mission Costs: ADR missions are expensive, especially for large objects or operations in higher orbits.

  2. Legal Ambiguities: Ownership and access rights complicate debris manipulation, especially for objects registered to foreign states.

  3. Target Prioritization: No broadly accepted criteria exist for choosing debris objects based on impact risk or mitigation benefit.

  4. Risk of Secondary Debris: Capture or removal attempts could inadvertently generate additional fragments. 

bottom of page