Live data from Hacker News

Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

starlinkmap.org

211–220 of 248 posts

Re: Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

#211
post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That sounds like an absolute distopian nightmare and the last person on earth that I want to be running this service is Elon Musk. Given that Musk was the only person with the ambition, capital, and ability to deliver such a project, you're basically saying that you'd rather have Starlink not exist at all than to have Musk in charge. >it's an incredible feat - and yet I still think it's a travesty that it's allowed…

>> you're basically saying that you'd rather have Starlink not exist at all than to have Musk in charge No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying having Musk in charge makes it distopian, but even without him at the helm I'd rather it didn't exist. >>Confirmed: You'd rather have every Starlink customer go dark than have someone you've been told to dislike provide those customers with a service they willingly sign up…

> night sky is a common good

But that good shouldn't to serve millions of people with something they need.

You rather have it totally unused instead at all.

> I'd have the exact same complaint about any competing constallation, and in fact I am going to have it because Amazon is building a competing service themselves.

I have bad news for you because there are about 10 other major constellation in development and those are only the ones that are a public.

Not a single country has put major effort into stopping it.

Pretty much every country agrees that this space should be used to serve the needs of its people.

Re: Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

#212

Does Starlink work in Norway or Alaska? I would never have guessed Starlink had this many satellites.

Yes. But there are much less of the sats.

There is basically a line at a certain latitude where the density of population is highest. So must sats circle between between that area.

But to cover the things further north (or south) respectively, SpaceX also has sats in polar orbit. Those allow for coverage from the poles to the max latitude.

Re: Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

#213

Maps like these are really useful for folks developing satcom firmware. I use https://iridiumwhere.com at least a couple times a week to help me test code. This one is particularly interesting for the sheer density of it - that's a TON of satellites. On a related note, anyone who hasn't done so should get to their country's lowest light-pollution area and do some star gazing (for Americans, I suggest Badlands Nationa…

I live in a dark skies area in the Southwest USA. I frequently see the trains as they are inserted into orbit, but your chance of seeing an individual Starlink satellite is zero. It's like trying to see a single object the size of a picnic table, in the dark, 400km away, going 27,000km/hr.

Let's do a bit of back-of-the-envelope rocket science.

Starlink has satellites in several orbits, but at least one I know they're using is 319mi (they have approval for shells as low as 210mi, but I'm not sure if they're using that yet). A human's central vision is about 60 degrees (NOT the same thing as your full field of view). The radius of the earth ranges between 3950 and 3963 miles. I'll call it 3955 for our purposes.

(3955+319) gives us a radius of 4274 miles. Throw in that 17,000mph (27,000 km/hr) figure, one can determine that a Starlink satellite moves at about 3.78 degrees per minute with respect to the center of Earth.

To make things simpler, (again, back of the envelope), I'm going to calculate this using basic trig. The radius of the earth is much larger than the satellite's orbit, so this shouldn't skew the numbers too much.

Imagine standing on the ground and looking straight upwards into the night sky. At a distance of 319 miles, your 60 degree field of view covers a plane that's 2⋅319⋅tan(30°) = 368 miles wide.

This plane cuts a chord through the satellite's circular orbit. Those two points are 2⋅arcsin(368 / (2⋅4274)) = 4.93 degrees apart.

Knowing both the angle between the two points on the chord and the angular speed of the satellite with respect to Earth, we can determine that the Starlink satellite will spend roughly 1.3 minutes (1 minute and 18 seconds) within your central field of view. So, the satellite is definitely not fast enough for the naked eye to miss it, assuming it's big and/or bright enough.

Normally, you'd be right about a picnic table hundreds of miles away. That's tiny and you'd never see it, no matter what speed it was moving at. However, satellites are highly reflective and because they're sitting high above Earth, they can be hit by sunlight even during the night. Maybe(?) they wouldn't be visible in the problem I just laid out, where you're looking straight up, but turn your head a bit and it becomes feasible.

Throw in the fact that there are thousands of them all marching in a spherical parade around Earth, and it's totally reasonable that they'd be visible from the ground. In fact, there's a whole website dedicated to this very phenomenon: https://findstarlink.com/. If we didn't have so much light pollution on the ground in my neck of the woods, the website indicates that I could see them a couple times a night.

Re: Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is totally incorrect, what do you think you are seeing in the trains? You can easily see each individual satellite. Just after sunset you can see many individual satellites, not just starlink.

Starlink reduces reflectivity with shielding once the satellites are in orbit. That’s why you only see the trails on their way to insertion. Without the shield, you’re right that the satellites would be visible post insertion.

They added the sun shields in mid-2020, after several hundred satellites had already been launched. Those remain visible, and make up about 8% of their fleet today.

Kinda makes me wonder what we're going to do about all these satellites in 50-60 years when there's thousands of decommissioned ones floating around.

Re: Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

#215
> The last Starlink mission launched

> 1 days, 17 hours, 0 mins, 21 sec ago.

> The next Starlink mission launches in

> 51 minutes, 19 seconds.

> Over the last 365 days, Starlink launches every

> 5.14 days on average.

Insane launch cadence on display. And it is only going to get better.

Re: Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

#216
This can't be an accurate realt-time map. The satellites are travelling way, way too fast. This map shows a satellite travelling from LA to Denver in 10 seconds.

You can literally see the satellites at night and they do not traverse horizon to horizon 1/10th as fast as depicted here.

Re: Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

#217

This can't be an accurate realt-time map. The satellites are travelling way, way too fast. This map shows a satellite travelling from LA to Denver in 10 seconds. You can literally see the satellites at night and they do not traverse horizon to horizon 1/10th as fast as depicted here.

By default, it's set at 16x speed (top-right on desktop)

Re: Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink reduces reflectivity with shielding once the satellites are in orbit. That’s why you only see the trails on their way to insertion. Without the shield, you’re right that the satellites would be visible post insertion.

They added the sun shields in mid-2020, after several hundred satellites had already been launched. Those remain visible, and make up about 8% of their fleet today. Kinda makes me wonder what we're going to do about all these satellites in 50-60 years when there's thousands of decommissioned ones floating around.

They deorbit themselves after about 5 years... so if starlink goes tits up, at worst you'll see the satellites for around 5 years. Sooner if they are intentionally deorbited.

Re: Real-time map of every Starlink satellite in orbit

#219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink reduces reflectivity with shielding once the satellites are in orbit. That’s why you only see the trails on their way to insertion. Without the shield, you’re right that the satellites would be visible post insertion.

They added the sun shields in mid-2020, after several hundred satellites had already been launched. Those remain visible, and make up about 8% of their fleet today. Kinda makes me wonder what we're going to do about all these satellites in 50-60 years when there's thousands of decommissioned ones floating around.

They’re easy to knock out of orbit and auto decay because of the light atmospheric drag. Shouldn’t be a problem.

Higher orbit debris could last a lot longer.

Post reply on HN