Space is getting crowded. And with that crowding comes risk—particularly the risk of satellite collisions. To mitigate it, operators rely on Space Surveillance and Tracking (SST) systems, which issue conjunction alerts when two objects are predicted to pass dangerously close. These alerts are meant to inform Collision Avoidance Maneuvers (CAMs) that protect assets and prevent cascading debris.
But here’s the issue: many of these warnings are wrong.
Due to imprecise or incomplete tracking data, a large share of alerts turn out to be false positives—warnings that signal danger where none exists. Yet satellite operators still act on them, executing costly maneuvers “just in case.”
The consequences?
• Unnecessary fuel consumption
• Disrupted operations
• Shortened satellite lifespans
• Additional risk and orbital uncertainty
• Eroding trust in the warning system itself
A Few High-Profile Examples
In April 2021, OneWeb executed an avoidance maneuver after being told its satellite had a 1.3% chance of colliding with a Starlink spacecraft—well above the typical 0.1% action threshold. SpaceX later claimed the risk had been overestimated. But by then, the maneuver was done and the fuel was gone.
In 2019, ESA’s Aeolus satellite also had to dodge a Starlink satellite. Not because the risk was clear—but because communication channels failed and coordination proved impossible. Again, the root problem was poor data and latency.
These are not isolated cases.
Starlink: Safety at a Cost
SpaceX’s Starlink satellites operate under a hyper-conservative threshold for maneuvers: 1 in 1,000,000 probability of collision—100× stricter than the usual 1 in 10,000 standard. As a result, the constellation performs an extraordinary number of CAMs.
In one six-month period, ~50,000 maneuvers were recorded across Starlink, or about 14 per satellite. Many of these avoided conjunctions that posed just a 0.0001% risk. Roughly 10% of the maneuvers occurred only because of Starlink’s ultra-low threshold.
This approach reduces the risk of missed collisions—but it comes at a cost. Each burn consumes fuel, perturbs orbital paths, and potentially triggers more conjunction warnings for other satellites down the line. It’s a compounding problem.
The Domino Effect of Debris
The 2021 Kosmos-1408 ASAT test created a debris field that triggered thousands of alerts. Up to 25% of Starlink’s maneuvers in early 2022 were in response to fragments from this single event. Most didn’t pose real danger—but the lack of precise tracking forced operators to act anyway.
It’s Not Just Starlink
ESA’s Sentinel-2A received over 8,000 alerts between 2015–2017. Almost none led to action. NASA’s Iridium constellation was seeing ~400 alerts per week—until the Iridium-33/Cosmos-2251 collision in 2009. That crash, which had been predicted as a safe pass, marked a turning point: better safe than sorry became the norm.
But that safety-first mentality, in a world of inaccurate data, has a price.
Moriba Jah, a leading expert in astrodynamics, warns that false alarms are creating a financial, operational, and environmental burden. Some operators have started ignoring alerts they believe to be false—introducing even more risk.
The Bottom Line
Without better data, satellite operators are stuck between two bad options:
Perform too many maneuvers, wasting fuel and resources
Or ignore some alerts, risking actual collisions
Neither is sustainable—especially as the number of space objects continues to rise.
At ARCA Dynamics, we believe precision in tracking is the key to solving this challenge. The solution lies in improving data quality, reducing latency, and fostering real-time coordination.
In the next articles, we’ll explore:
The economic impact of false positives on LEO constellations
A life-cycle financial analysis of unnecessary maneuvers
The benefits of enhanced tracking precision
The evolving roles of commercial and governmental SST systems
Because behind every maneuver, there’s a cost.
Understanding where inefficiencies originate is the first step toward fixing them.
Stay tuned.