Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

spacenews.com

101–110 of 276 posts

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it might be that the astronomer community didn't expect Starlink to actually happen. A lot of people still haven't learned that SpaceX isn't just hyping things up.

Off topic: I mentioned to someone at StarLink the idea of equipping their gear to perform global RF interferometry, will let you know if it turns into something!

That's awesome!

(Also, why do I get a feeling the two of us talked about using satellite constellations and interferometry on HN before?)

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#102
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software should be able to account for this. If photoshop can remove people from photos, why can't astronomy software remove satellites? Orbit is already pretty cluttered and we can't remove much that gets stuck up there already.

This isn't just about astrophotography, this has to do with real science too. Remember, most science work is already on a tight budget and now they will have to waste some of that budget sorting through the added visual clutter.

It's like with nature on earth, tech pollutes things. It's not really anything new.

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#103
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do not think it is possible to find any other real solution The solution is not to fill up our precious LEO with space trash. If you want faster Internet lay some fiber. It's probably even less expensive to lay some fiber across the whole jungle than Musks megalomaniac fantasies. As hobby radio astronomer this whole story fills me with rage.

The current bottleneck to broadband access isn't the fiber backhaul, it's last mile delivery. That part is expensive and labor intensive. Solutions like LEO satellites and 5G wireless internet allow broadband access to be more quickly expanded to places where it's not feasible or profitable for companies to lay hundreds of miles of cables to each individual home. If you frame your comment as "My astronomy hobby is mo…

> The current bottleneck to broadband access isn't the fiber backhaul, it's last mile delivery.

The "last mile delivery" problem is easily covered with 4G/LTE already. High licensing cost of spectral bandwidth are more relevant than labor costs at this point. A pure political problem.

> If you frame your comment as "My astronomy hobby is more important than internet access to all", it doesn't sound as great.

If you frame your comment as "A filthy rich[1] billionaire getting even richer is more important than a clear night sky and litter free LEO", it doesn't sound so great.

And by the way "hobby" astronomers make much more contributions than you are obviously aware of. E.g. Earth endangering asteroids will most likely be detected by hobbyists because looking in many directions with weak telescopes will have success with higher likelihood than a single specific scientific survey catching anything accidentally.

1.: https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/cash-strapped-elon-musk-buy...

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#104
post #6

“No one thought of this,” she said. “We didn’t think of it. The astronomy community didn’t think of it.” I really have trouble believing that nobody mentioned adding thousands of satellites would go unnoticed. It is damn near impossible to take any image of the night sky without having a satellite streak through the frame. I have plenty of images with multiple satellites visible at the same time. In wide angle timela…

I agree. I remember hearing/reading about similar problems from previous satellite constellations. Nobody thought of this means that SpaceX spoke with nobody who could tell them about this issue.

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#105
post #86
post #6

“No one thought of this,” she said. “We didn’t think of it. The astronomy community didn’t think of it.” I really have trouble believing that nobody mentioned adding thousands of satellites would go unnoticed. It is damn near impossible to take any image of the night sky without having a satellite streak through the frame. I have plenty of images with multiple satellites visible at the same time. In wide angle timela…

> “No one thought of this,” she said. > “We didn’t think of it. > The astronomy community didn’t think of it.” Oh Really? In 1979, NASA founded the Orbital Debris Program to adopt mitigation measures for space debris in earth orbit. Apparently heaven forbids a web search on Astronomy & space junk. Or checking with astroimagery software to detect & mask frames contaminated with existing satellites streaks

That program's purpose is entirely different, though. It's focused on crashes between satellites, not avoiding impacts on astronomy.

SpaceX's constellation is already specifically set at a low orbit to prevent buildup of space debris. That impact was absolutely considered and mitigated from the start.

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off topic: I mentioned to someone at StarLink the idea of equipping their gear to perform global RF interferometry, will let you know if it turns into something!

That's awesome! (Also, why do I get a feeling the two of us talked about using satellite constellations and interferometry on HN before?)

We did! That’s what caused me to inquire when the opportunity presented itself.

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>charlatan like Musk I'm not a fanboy by any means but the guy built two companies and launched a car from his factory into space from a rocket his other business built. He's personally spearheading the early stages of commercial space exploration. I don't know that I'd describe him as a charlatan.

Musk did not found Tesla, but would like you to believe that he did: https://www.quora.com/Did-Elon-Musk-found-Tesla-1 Maybe 'charlatan' is unfair, but he's certainly more of a sales-and-hype man than a real engineering type. I don't understand why so many technical people are snowed by his razzle dazzle.

While true, the company was founded in July 2003 and Musk joined in February 2004. The first Roadster prototypes were revealed in 2006.

Acting like he hitched his flag to an already successful company is disingenuous.

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's awesome! (Also, why do I get a feeling the two of us talked about using satellite constellations and interferometry on HN before?)

We did! That’s what caused me to inquire when the opportunity presented itself.

Right! I found it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19188205.

Thanks for remembering!

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>charlatan like Musk I'm not a fanboy by any means but the guy built two companies and launched a car from his factory into space from a rocket his other business built. He's personally spearheading the early stages of commercial space exploration. I don't know that I'd describe him as a charlatan.

Musk did not found Tesla, but would like you to believe that he did: https://www.quora.com/Did-Elon-Musk-found-Tesla-1 Maybe 'charlatan' is unfair, but he's certainly more of a sales-and-hype man than a real engineering type. I don't understand why so many technical people are snowed by his razzle dazzle.

And so what? founding a company is the easiest step (a little bit of money and paperwork). executing to make it the world leader in electric mobility is what really matters. So your point is really irrelevant.

Re: SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy

#110
(I'm not speaking for any of my current or past employers, just for myself, and how I've seen this play out. One employer being a telescope impacted by Starlink, and the other being SpaceX, I want both sides to succeed.)

First, astronomers know that satellites can disrupt observations. They've known for a while, and have had to deal with things like flares from Irridium satellites, which were probably when these problems were first taken seriously. (It was a design defect where shiny panels would reflect the sun in a very efficient way).

Astronomers use all sorts of image processing, because satellites aren't the only noise in the picture. The CCDs have to be kept cryogenically cool, and there's all sorts of electrical noise as well. There's not a lot of photons being collected in the grand scheme of things, so dealing with the noise floor is a real problem. There are all sorts of ways for removing tracks. And don't forget weather!

Now, that being said, even I was confused why this would cause a problem. The satellites are in low earth orbit, so low that they won't be able to reflect the sunlight, since they are in earth's shadow. Only during twilight and dawn will satellites be in the right position to reflect the sunlight back to the ground off of some panel.

Now, these are not prime observing hours for many people, since it is still not as dark as it could be. So most people point into the darkest parts of the sky (up) rather than at parts where there is still twilight (like nearer the horizon).

But for some types of observations, like near earth asteroids, you want to point into the evening sky to look for them, since that is one of the places you want to look, and the sky conditions should be good enough. In these pictures you'll get streaks of light as the satellites pass through.

Even if there is no light reflecting, these satellites could occlude a distant star or galaxy momentarily. You wouldn't see a streak as much as the light would go away and come back. This would affect how bright you see the star, since over the time of the exposure (let's say 30 seconds) you'll collect less light while something is blocking the light. This can also make it a bit more tricky to look at variable stars, where the light gets stronger and dimmer naturally.

I would say that astronomers definitely knew about these problems, since they have to deal with all sorts of similar problems, but the pitch didn't get fevered until people saw the first set of Starlink satellites and just how bright they were. SpaceX moves a lot faster than astronomy.

As for SpaceX not thinking about the astronomical implications of Starlink, I could believe that. I think most of them were more concerned with if it is possible rather than the implications of doing it. As much as I would think the two fields would know more about each other, I find they are very different and run in different circles it seems (launch vehicle industry vs astronomers), so I could easily see not much cross pollination between the two. For example, there were lots of NASA astronauts and air force people visiting SpaceX, but I don't remember one astronomer (not that I met everyone).

Post reply on HN