Technology & Science
SpaceX Seeks FCC OK for 1 Million AI Data Satellites as New Study Puts LEO ‘CRASH Clock’ at 2.8 Days
On 31 Jan 2026, SpaceX filed with the FCC to deploy up to one million solar-powered data-center satellites—just days after researchers reported that Low-Earth Orbit would suffer a catastrophic collision only 2.8 days after loss of control, highlighting the collision crisis even as SpaceX plans massive expansion.
Focusing Facts
- FCC application dated 31 Jan 2026 requests licensing for 1,000,000 satellites in 500–2,000 km orbits to process AI workloads using solar power.
- Thiele et al.’s December 2025 arXiv study calculates the Collision Realization and Significant Harm (CRASH) clock has fallen from 121 days in 2018 to 2.8 days by June 2025.
- On the same week, SpaceX announced it will lower 4,400 existing Starlink satellites from 340 mi to 300 mi after a December 2025 200 m near-miss with a Chinese satellite.
Context
Orbit is replaying the 19th-century American railway boom: dizzying expansion (≈15,000 satellites today vs. a proposed 1 million) with governance lagging the technology, just as the 1869 ‘golden spike’ era preceded decades of costly wrecks before safety rules matured. The CRASH-clock finding echoes the 1978 NASA Kessler-Cour-Palais paper that first warned of runaway debris; what was distant theory then now measures in days. Musk’s filing bets on two long-term trends—super-cheap reusable rockets and insatiable AI compute—but also accelerates the tragedy-of-the-commons dynamic in the orbital environment. If unchecked, a Carrington-scale geomagnetic storm (1859) could paralyze satellite control and tip the CRASH clock to zero, potentially closing the launch window for decades and setting back humanity’s spacefaring trajectory on a century scale. Conversely, if regulators harness this moment to impose traffic rules and debris-mitigation standards, the episode could mark the messy birth of an orbital governance regime as consequential as the 1919 Paris Convention was for aviation.
Perspectives
Science and tech safety advocates
e.g., ScienceDaily, Digital Trends — They argue that ever-growing satellite mega-constellations have pushed low-Earth orbit to a tipping point where a single disruption could trigger an unstoppable chain-reaction of collisions within days, threatening humanity’s access to space. Their alarm-focused framing leans on worst-case ‘Kessler syndrome’ scenarios and short CRASH-clock timelines, which can sensationalize risk and bolster calls for stricter regulation even though such catastrophic cascades remain hypothetical.
Pro-SpaceX innovation / industry boosters
e.g., GeekWire, ArcaMax, Boston Herald — They present SpaceX’s plan to loft up to a million solar-powered data-center satellites as a visionary leap that will slash AI computing costs, tap limitless solar energy and advance humanity toward a Kardashev-II civilization. The coverage echoes SpaceX filings and Musk’s rhetoric, spotlighting economic upside while largely glossing over collision, debris and astronomical-impact worries that critics raise.
Regulatory and market skeptics
e.g., GEO TV, ET Telecom — They stress that the FCC and other regulators are unlikely to rubber-stamp the proposal for a million satellites anytime soon, citing existing caps, space-debris concerns and precedent of partial approvals. By highlighting bureaucratic obstacles and expert doubts, they may amplify uncertainty to temper investor hype, yet still rely on speculative figures and may underplay SpaceX’s lobbying power and technical mitigation plans.