Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 395 posts

Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

#151

Post by jsiepkes »

Spare_account wrote: post #30
jsiepkes wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The satellite itself is way more expensive then a ground based telescope. Maintenance of a space telescope is much more expensive then a ground based telescope. All in all launching a satellite is just a fraction of the total costs of a space telescope. On top of that SpaceX has also not proven to be real friendly towards space telescopes, so that just "moves" the problem. See for example: https://www.forbes.com/site…

Your link describes a failure of SpaceX's internal ticketing system which resulted in ESA thinking that SpaceX were ignoring them. It seems unfair to paint SpaceX as anti-space telescope on that basis.

> Your link describes a failure of SpaceX's internal ticketing system which resulted in ESA thinking that SpaceX were ignoring them.

I'm not saying they are anti-space telescope. I'm saying I'm seeing little evidence they want to play nice with other people who have a stake in space. I have seen mostly evidence to the contrary.

Regarding that particular incident; ESA's (way larger) satellite had that orbit / trajectory for quite a while before SpaceX decided to enter it's path. SpaceX should never have created that situation to begin with. And when the situation was created (for whatever reason) SpaceX should have manoeuvred their satellite out of the way without requiring ESA intervention to begin with. And then when ESA had to ask they should have responded. That can't all be blamed on a faulty ticket system...

Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

#152

Post by BurningFrog »

natch wrote: post #139
verytrivial wrote: post #15

The 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…

The first few are bright, but as you said only at dawn or dusk. The vast majority of future ones are intended to be dark, with partial mitigations (not perfect, nobody is making that claim) like dark coating applied by SpaceX at their own expense. With plentiful availability of orbital delivery, we can also expect more earth-orbiting space telescopes in our future, including private ones and with numbers possibly sev…

> If asked directly, Elon is often responsive.

Yeah, but the responses can be unpredictable :)

Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

#153

Post by sumedh »

ashtonbaker wrote: post #150
sumedh wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead advancing human knowledge it's just going to fill rich guy pockets even more. Isnt Elon helping to advance human knowledge as well?

Not really?

Making space flight cheaper and more reliable certainly helps advance human knowledge in my opinion.

Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

#154

Post by 0-_-0 »

dx87 wrote: post #147
0-_-0 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You point to saying that 2% is a small part of an image as a sign of arrogance? Isn't it a small part of an image?

You didn't say it's small, you said it's "trivial". This isn't about people taking pretty pictures, this is about people trying to do actual work. It doesn't matter if it's 1% or 100% if it still ruins what they're working on. So yes, you're being arrogant by saying that just because it's a "trivial" amount that's ruined, when you don't understand what they're doing.

2% is trivial. They lost 2% of information (as someone pointed out this might be closer to 20%). This means the cost to the astronomer was 2% (or 20%). Calling this "ruining" is an exaggeration. Of course it would ruin a pretty picture, but "This isn't about people taking pretty pictures, this is about people trying to do actual work." where you can choose the part of information you take into account.

Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

#156

Post by [deleted] »

verytrivial wrote: post #15

The 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…

[deleted]

Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

#157

Post by BurningFrog »

q3k wrote: post #52
reitzensteinm wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally believe that pervasive high speed internet even in remote locations will do more for humanity than the scientific cost of these satellites. However, this conversation has basically been skipped over. Maybe you're right and I'm wrong. The constellations are being launched, and there's zero chance of shutting them down once they're serving a commercial role. Considering the abundant red tape in the modern…

> I personally believe that pervasive high speed internet even in remote locations will do more for humanity than the scientific cost of these satellites. I've had faster Internet than the average Starlink speedtest says, in rural Romania, at the foot of a mountain, wild bears and all: https://twitter.com/q3k/status/1172621386977861632 . Internet access in rural areas is pretty much a solved problem, it just now hing…

It's not a solved problem in Sudan, Polynesia or on vehicles. Satellites is the solution there.

Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

#158

Post by 0-_-0 »

welterde wrote: post #149
0-_-0 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you move the shutter in front of the receiver when you know a satellite will transit?

Sure. And for small field of view things that might be the future. But if you are looking at large chunks of the sky at some point with enough satellites the shutter will have to stay shut for the whole duration of the exposure.. so not really a good solution for that.

What if SpaceX funded research into shutters that cover part of the CCD? Is that a possible solution?

Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

#159

Post by BurningFrog »

simion314 wrote: post #45
dr_dshiv wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the solution more satellites for astronomy? In fact, couldn't the constellation of commercial satellites be used to make a massive distributed hubble telescope?

Will those american billionaires pay say for more European satellites to compensate? What if this were Chinese satellites would you have the same opinion? It would be great if this billionaires would also launch scientific satellites payed from their pocket to compensate, then I would change my mind.

SpaceX is lowering satellite launch cost by 90% for anyone, Chinese or otherwise.

This should start a golden age of space astronomy, even if Elon doesn't give away some telescope launches as PR.

Re: How satellite ‘megaconstellations’ will photobomb astronomy images

#160

Post by [deleted] »

BurningFrog wrote: post #152
natch wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first few are bright, but as you said only at dawn or dusk. The vast majority of future ones are intended to be dark, with partial mitigations (not perfect, nobody is making that claim) like dark coating applied by SpaceX at their own expense. With plentiful availability of orbital delivery, we can also expect more earth-orbiting space telescopes in our future, including private ones and with numbers possibly sev…

> If asked directly, Elon is often responsive. Yeah, but the responses can be unpredictable :)

[deleted]
Post reply on HN