[deleted]
How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
331–340 of 395 posts
Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
#332Living in a city, I didn't understand how big a deal this was until I got a view of the clear night sky in a less populated area recently. The satellites are already visible by eye everywhere, and there are only 655 Starlink satellites. There's approval for 12000, and SpaceX is seeking approval for 30000! If they're all going to be this reflective, satellites will be the main thing we see in the night sky a few years…
I recently went for a run around Mt Saint Helens, which I started before sunrise. It's a very desolate area, with limited light pollution. I suddenly noticed dozens of satellites flying overhead and was startled by how vivid they were. First time I've ever seen them. My response was to become a little bit choked up. I haven't felt pride in humanity like that for a while. As we become a space faring civilization, the night sky will be influenced by us more and more. It's not worth holding progress back for the sake of a nice view.
Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt it'd be legal to sell StarLink receivers in large parts of the continent. Has any nation ever successfully outlawed satellite reception? The roofs of buildings even in nations like Iran and KSA are studded with dishes.
India has banned most satellite telephones [1] (Inmarsat is still allowed apparently) and still catches people using them. There's a more complete list at [2]. Musk has already admitted that providing satellite services to countries like China can become a problem [3]. Countries that don't want StarLink and don't have the capabilities to take out LEO satellites might start to team up with China, Russia and other coun…
Few nations, especially in Africa, have the sort of control over the sale of small electronics that is envisioned here. One would hope that the monopoly providers wouldn't invest many resources in policing areas they don't even serve... Musk probably isn't relying on any one particular nation to validate his business plan.
Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
Satellites naturally cross paths over time, there is no “ESA” path. This is standards and expected, SpaceX is only guilty of a support failure, which has been corrected. And SpaceX has designed and is implementing shade visors on all new Starlink satellites at their own expense, for the sole reason of reducing their reflection and brightness for astronomers. No one made Elon do that, he chose to significantly increas…
As you say, there are standards and expectations that SpaceX failed to uphold. They shouldn’t be praised or thanked for doing what they should have done in the first place and only corrected after been called out.
You are confusing two seperate things.
The ESA thing, and the standards based thing, is a communication failure, where SpaceX failed to promptly reply to an email by accident.
The reflectivity based thing is something without standards more stringent than what SpaceX was already complying with, which they voluntarily chose to improve to be a good citizen, and in which they are going above and beyond the existing standards.
Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
SpaceX is adding visors, which solve the problem without heating the satellites.
It is completely impossible to block light and not absorb and re-radiate heat.
It is possible to reflect the light away from earth and the satellite, which is all the astronomers want and is blocking the light from reaching the main body of the satellite.
It is also possible to absorb the heat somewhere else if you do just absorb the light.
Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is completely impossible to block light and not absorb and re-radiate heat.
It is possible to reflect the light away from earth and the satellite, which is all the astronomers want and is blocking the light from reaching the main body of the satellite. It is also possible to absorb the heat somewhere else if you do just absorb the light.
Its not possible to keep the angle consistent without constant active station keeping, which would require an entire redesign.
Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet you used Africa as an example, instead of North America and Australia. Why? EDIT: Wow, you guys are really bad at admitting your own blatantly obvious biases, aren't you?
Because I've been to the Sahara desert and it's the most remote place I've ever been. I experienced the gaps in coverage first hand. There are equivalent places in central Australia, but even though I grew up here I haven't been more than a few hours drive away from the coasts. I haven't been to North America. Russia didn't cross my mind, but I haven't been there either. This isn't to say I don't have warped perspect…
I believe you, thank you for engaging with my questions in a civil manner (I can't say the same for the way people initially downvoted my questions, but that isn't your fault of course - I hope it was clear that the "you guys" in my previous comment referred to them).
Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
#338The article covers the mitigations already in place and how they only partially resolve the issue. These satellites are low, bright (at dawn/dusk) and very soon to be incredibly numerous. Yes, it is possible for data workflows to post-process these streaks away, but not all configurations allow this, and whereas previous intrusions were somewhat rare and could be ignored that simply won't be the case due to three com…
I'm sure SpaceX would be happy to launch your ground-based telescope just above their constellation for a nominal fee.
Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
#339Could a country (or a continent) in theory remove satellites hanging above their area? What if countries decide to extend the airspace to the aerospace?
> What if countries decide to extend the airspace to the aerospace
This is basically unthinkable.
Attempting to knock down all the satellites that ever fly above your country would mean knocking down every non-geostationary satellite that ever reaches your latitude (or any latitude farther from the equator than you).
Satellites are a key part of how we all know if anyone else is launching nuclear bombs or doing anything else so stupid. In the event that a country tried this I would expect that the foreign reaction would be very extreme. In the event that a country succeeded I would put the odds of nuclear war at above 50% and of conventional war at near 100%.
On the flipside you might almost get away with knocking down a few satellites with relatively minor reactions (at least compared to war, and if you had some good justification), as long as you don't try and knock them all out...
Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is possible to reflect the light away from earth and the satellite, which is all the astronomers want and is blocking the light from reaching the main body of the satellite. It is also possible to absorb the heat somewhere else if you do just absorb the light.
Its not possible to keep the angle consistent without constant active station keeping, which would require an entire redesign.
I mean... for any sort of shade to work they must be doing some sort of station keeping to keep it between the satellite and the sun. Moreover they need stationkeeping on their final orbit to point their antenna in the right direction. So I'm not sure I see your point?