Discussion
On first glance (pre-caffeine) it looks like there are a bunch of mansplainers doing math to defend Reflect Orbital in my mentions. FANTASTIC.
(Editing to add that reading more carefully, I think most of it is actually well-intentioned discussion trying to understand how the hell RO thinks they have any kind of business case. But I am extra grumpy because it's hot. No blocking needed.)
Good morning to everyone except the people defending or funding Reflect Orbital.
@sundogplanets I genuinely don't understand how anyone can think Reflect Orbital is a good idea. Ignoring the impacts to astronomy, and the orbital mechanics and space traffic (you definitely know more about those than me anyway), the fundamental problem with global warming is that earth is retaining too much energy. How is adding more energy to that situation a good idea?
@sundogplanets I am wondering: is space sabotage already a thing? If not, these reflectors really ask for it.
@sundogplanets buncha dicks with dicks being dicks, as the prophecies foretold. But seriously, why guys? Piles of reflective shit in LEO is a bad idea, regardless of the reason for it, and beaming sunlight down from orbit is absurd.
@sundogplanets Oooh, more people to block, lol.
@sundogplanets Good morning back!
(I'm going to do math today, it's going to be very boring reagent calculations and no one wants that in their mentions lest they fall asleep)
@sundogplanets Strength to your Block button. Thanks for keeping up the good fight. I’m sending messages to my electeds here in the US asking for both action against Reflect Orbital, and an investigation into the FCC about their mishandling of the comment process.
On a more serious note, does anyone know how to find out who is insuring Reflect Orbital? Seems like they might want to know the company they're insuring admitted in an official FCC document that they could cause permanent eye damage to people who look at their satellite through a telescope...
@sundogplanets I guess it depends if the target area is under the right jurisdiction? Just aim it in an area where companies are already dumping chemical pollution 🤬
Stupidest possible Day of the Triffids reboot.
Seems like there's not much in the way of published details, but I found one article that offers an overview of risk assessments, and they mention several possible carriers in the 'Space Mission' category type...
"... with underwriters, including AXA XL, Munich Re, and Chubb, maintaining specialized aerospace liability teams."
https://dataintelo.com/report/space-mission-insurance-brokerage-market
I assume launch insurance is mandatory, but is there a possibility that some types might be optional or even 'self-insured'?
@sundogplanets It's a question worth asking in interviews too; and not just eye damage (which is of course worse!); a lot of expensive gear is pointed at the sky and they could damage all of it as well.
Excellent thought.
@sundogplanets REALLY good question.
Insurers have historically kept a rein on more sketchy launch companies, since a rocket going wrong has some rather obvious externalities. I have a feeling RO's insurer will learn about their externalities very quickly.
@sundogplanets Interesting point Sweetheart. Space insurers are a niche group, try checking FCC filings or the launch provider's docs for liability coverage requirements. The eye damage risk they flagged is real for big telescope users, even if low probability for one sat. Definitely something insurers should be asking hard questions about.
@sundogplanets If Congress has any say, they'll just put warning labels on telescopes and ban amateur astronomy.
@sundogplanets
It is usually a governance requirement that corporations must display the name of their corporate insurer. At Bricks and mortar admin facilities. In most countries. Certificate on Display. Direct question aimed at the Administrators should get an honest answer within a statutory period of time.
My wife was doing reinsurance for aviation and space (satellite launches) However, she is retired. You might inquire major reinsurance companies. If needed, I might get some pointers from her.
@sundogplanets Try Aon as the broker and Munich Re as the reinsurance company. Nothing announced, but there are only so many companies in the space insurance business, and Munich Re specializes in complex/new payloads. Other major providers:
AXA XL
Swiss Re
Lloyd's of London
Secondary providers:
AIG
Allianz
Chubb
USAIG
Hiscox
Hannover Re
Other brokers (like Aon):
Willis Towers Watson
Marsh
Guy Carpenter
There are more, if not one of those
https://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/6167144/space-insurance-market-report#product--adaptive
@sundogplanets
the answer comes to mind as, no. There is not likely to be a simple answer to the question of who insures. If the business is entirely owned and operated and conducted within one area then one insurance company might insure it, or one insurance might insure some of it and might farm out insurance coverage to commercial insurers for catastrophic loss coverage, or not. Expand the question to a business which is conducted outside of a single region of insurance coverage and then you can add optional headache of corporate legal team looking for liability loopholes in wording of insurance policy coverage, wording of international exemptions and laws, wording of space treaties, and any past precedent of proving strict liability and shared liability. Oh, and from what I was told many decades ago, the name of an insured is treated by the insurance company just like a trade secret. You can ask, maybe they would brag, but it's not a simple answer and there are places where it is legal to be self-insured and there is the possibility that some shady business would consider bankruptcy cheaper than insurance and stupidly think the corporate veil would save corporate officers from severally and collectively being liable.
@sundogplanets I have a contact who can almost certainly find out. Whether they are able to disclose is a different question, will let you know in a day or so.
@http_error_418 Thank you for trying!
@sundogplanets I've e-mailed them. Will let you know if and when they reply.
@rey Worth a try, thanks!
@sundogplanets What kind of insurance do you even carry when one of the possible (likely?) outcomes of your business include "Will make Earth's orbit inaccessible for decades" or "Will cause globally widespread ecological disaster" or "Will cause irreparable harm to Earth's ozone layer radiation shield that's necessary for life to exist on the only known habitable world in the universe."
Because Geico ain't cutting it.
@Legit_Spaghetti @sundogplanets
No insurance. US gov is responsible, right?
@knud @Legit_Spaghetti I know when AST SpaceMobile lost one of their awful giant satellites from a launch failure a few weeks ago, they said insurance would pay for it, so whatever. So these companies definitely have SOME kind of insurance.
@sundogplanets @knud @Legit_Spaghetti
afaik from my wife, usually only launch failures are insured ("hull"), not liability of operating a satellite.
@sundogplanets @Legit_Spaghetti
But only for the value of the sat, to rebuild it or also for damages of ... <gestures at everything>?
@knud @Legit_Spaghetti the US gov't is only liable for damages that happen on the ground due to reentries in other countries (according to the Space Liability Convention). Does eye damage count for that? Veeerrrryyyy interesting question...
@sundogplanets @knud @Legit_Spaghetti One of the other people I follow, @alysondecker does space law. She might have a take on it.
@pdkoenig @sundogplanets @knud @Legit_Spaghetti My initial take is no- the government would not pay for it- because even if technically strict liability- they would argue causation (how can we know this caused that specific injury)- obvious risk (why are you looking at shiny objects like the sun)- etc. they definitely would not pay out injured Americans. (We know that from a piece of debris hitting a house.) And I can’t imagine enforcement would happen if it was someone in another country.
@pdkoenig @sundogplanets @Knud @Legit_Spaghetti As to the insurance coverage- it is usually limited to commercial losses/loss of equipment- not coverage for injuries to others. At least that’s what I’ve seen.
@alysondecker @pdkoenig @Knud Thank you for the legal view of the situation! (Even if it's depressing...)
@sundogplanets @knud @Legit_Spaghetti not my area of expertise, but I did take a space law class in law school in the last decade. I think we are in uncharted territory here with regard to liability for injury on earth from light from an object in space. The important part is their admission of potential harm in the filing. I don’t think the FCC had grounds to deny them. Insurance past launch is $$, and optional in US.
@sundogplanets @Legit_Spaghetti
Uncharted territory.
Similarly unclear whether it's a crime to take my 500kW laser to fry Reflect Orbital sat's communication antenna...
Please forgive the ignorant question: Are we sure that Reflect Orbital or their insurers would even be liable under current statutes and treaties?
Oh, that is a REALLY good question.
@sundogplanets Do not engage, block them, there is no point in allowing them further access
Install bonfire.cafe
Get the full app experience
