SpaceX working on fix for Starlink satellites so they don’t disrupt astronomy • Hacker News Board

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

#241

Post by strainer » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 4:28 AM UTC

cbanek wrote: post #204

mstipetic wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds to me like a new technology and a way of operating has come and we're trying to make it accommodate the old way of doing things. If we really have a way to launch thousands of satellites easily, can't we replace the terrestrial functionality with that? Let's launch hundreds of satellites observing near earth asteroids. If a private company can do it, governments definitely can

So while it sounds good that we've fixed the launch industry and can launch everything cheaper, that we should only have space based telescopes, space telescopes are a very different game from ground based telescopes. First, as others have pointed out, is size. Ground based mirrors are very large, in the 10s of meters, and those mirrors are extremely heavy, like tons. You can't lift one of those mirrors up on one roc…

> Ground based mirrors are very large, in the 10s of meters, and those mirrors are extremely heavy, like tons.

Seemingly fantastically - SpaceX is currently constructing a system designed to launch 100 tons to LEO, for as low as $35/kg [1]. Musk says this capability is what the Starlink business is to pay for. It appears lately, more realistic than it has sounded.

[1] https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2019/10/29/the-spacex-sta... ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21397285 )

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

#242

Post by mlyle » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 4:59 AM UTC

laken wrote: post #238

mlyle wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a 1999 article, well before the announcement of Starlink, talking about the increasing problems of trails spoiling deep sky observations--- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027311779... > From Table 1 it is clear that since 1985 the annual mean number of trails has risen from 2.5 to 2.9 in a 60 minute exposure, an increase of 16%; the number of spacecraft on orbit has increased by 39% in the…

The original assumption, as far as I'm aware, was that Starlink being in such a low orbit wouldn't have these issues that previous satellites had.

That's a bit of a strange assumption. Height doesn't have too great of an impact, other than reaching eclipse from solar illumination a little earlier. Given that Iridium has been a nuisance and they're at 780km, versus Starlink at 550km and 1150km...

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

#243

Post by mcbutterbunz » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 5:11 AM UTC

wongarsu wrote: post #20

vasili111 wrote: post #12

Also do not forget that SpaceX is not the only company that wants to launch low orbit satelites. I do not think it is possible to find any other real solution other then to move telescopes to space.

With James Web having an decently sized mirror on a space telescope that's not as ridiculous as it once was. Still we should search for cheaper solutions first. https://www.eso.org/public/usa/images/eso1617z/?lang

JWST still hasnt launched after all these years. Building space based telescopes that will last years without maintenance is hard.

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

#244

Post by skinkestek » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 5:30 AM UTC

kbrwn wrote: post #91

dang wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You broke the site guidelines badly with this flamebait and generic tangent, which predictably started a wretched flamewar. Then you perpetuated it. You do a lot of good for HN with your interesting submissions, but you've also been vandalizing HN with destructive comments for years. We've asked you not to do this many times. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20356880 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18887148…

How is this comment flamebait? First time that I have really thought you missed the boat. Please don't censor people just because they criticize HN or the community.

I was also surprised but then I read up on the rest of The comments from that account in this thread as well and think that it something like that might be justified.

I also read the rest of the comments linked as examples and some of them where obvious to me and some were not.

I'm not a native speaker though and I realize dang has a huge advantage there as well as access to see detailed voting statistics to see what riles people up.

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

#245

Post by wpietri » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 5:57 AM UTC

mrandish wrote: post #171

wpietri wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of the negativity is who benefits from the problem versus who has to pay to fix it. If SpaceX were causing a problem for astronomers while also for free launching radically better space-based tools, it wouldn't be nearly as big a deal. But instead SpaceX hopes to pocket a lot of money, while the harms are falling on other people.

> SpaceX hopes to pocket a lot of money True but to their credit SpaceX's launch prices are substantially lower than pre-existing options and they have been a leader in a step change in competitive launch options coming to market.

So? I don't understand how that's material to my point.

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

#246

Post by londons_explore » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 8:33 AM UTC

greglindahl wrote: post #206

nradov wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink satellites are too small to do much orbital maneuvering. They only carry a small supply of krypton gas for their station keeping thrusters.

They have enough propellant to change their orbital height by quite a lot, more than the typical satellite (other than GTO-to-GEO thrusters.) OTOH you can just ask SpaceX or the Air Force where they have been in the past, SpaceX uses GPS and the Air Force radar is accurate enough for knowing where they were.

If the astronomer community requested it, I'm sure spacex would give them a real-time (or even a few minutes ahead of time) feed of satellite positions accurate to less than a pixel on these telescopes.

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

#247

Post by londons_explore » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 8:39 AM UTC

mlindner wrote: post #205

9192631770_Hz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I’m an astronomer and I can tell you this SpaceX statement is pure BS. The astronomy community absolutely thought of this before any of these satellites were launched. I’ve personally talked about it at public outreach events (and it was members of the public who brought it up) and topic has definitely come up at professional meetings...but there is just a general feeling of powerlessness, both from the point of…

> Yes, I’m an astronomer and I can tell you this SpaceX statement is pure BS. The astronomy community absolutely thought of this before any of these satellites were launched. I’ve personally talked about it at public outreach events (and it was members of the public who brought it up) and topic has definitely come up at professional meetings...but there is just a general feeling of powerlessness, both from the point…

Many of the other constellations look unlikely to be completed.

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

#248

Post by calabin » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 10:17 AM UTC

nordsieck wrote: post #112

SamReidHughes wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was a bit wrong in my initial estimate. More satellites can't improve latency by much once they get dense enough, and it looks like Starlink has enough such that the altitude would be on the same scale as distance. Still doesn't matter for the typical home user. Like, I get 21 ms ping to servers in my local city.

> Still doesn't matter for the typical home user. One very important market they're going after is global arbitrageurs.

Do you have any evidence of this? I work in algorithmic trading/finance and I'm relatively certain that this isn't true.

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

#249

Post by 9192631770_Hz » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 12:16 PM UTC

s1k3b8 wrote: post #232

9192631770_Hz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I’m an astronomer and I can tell you this SpaceX statement is pure BS. The astronomy community absolutely thought of this before any of these satellites were launched. I’ve personally talked about it at public outreach events (and it was members of the public who brought it up) and topic has definitely come up at professional meetings...but there is just a general feeling of powerlessness, both from the point of…

> charlatan like Musk If Musk was a charlatan, we wouldn't have this problem. Musk would have failed to put spacelink satellites in orbit and we wouldn't have this problem. The reason why we have this problem is precisely because Musk isn't a charlatan. > I also know a lot of people directly involved in SSA and all of them are very concerned with how much these new constellations are going to increase the risk of col…

I call Musk a charlatan because he tries to pass himself off as something he isn't. His physics and engineering knowledge is nowhere near the level he boasts about, and he often states things that an SME would find laughable were they not eaten up without question by so many ill-informed cultists. It's dangerous, and unfortunately it's probably going to result in even more harm to people before he's reigned in.

And to clarify, the SSA folks I was referring to are against these types of constellations particularly in the context of the speed and lack of oversight (and no, FCC/ITU spectrum approval has nothing to do with oversight and regulation of the physical objects in orbit) of these ventures.

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

#250

Post by woliveirajr » Mon, Dec 09, 2019, 12:22 PM UTC

justin66 wrote: post #214

antognini wrote: post #152

As an astronomer once upon a time I follow a number of my former colleagues on Twitter and pretty regularly see them posting images that have been ruined by Starlink. Here is one from just 12 hours ago: https://twitter.com/MassiveStarGuy/status/120358895831320576... This is going to have a bigger impact on the more expensive observations that require long-duration exposures.

This definitely wasn't ruined (it's amateur video) but if anyone wants to see Starlink photobombing an astronomer, this amateur video of a recent meteor shower is an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHI8Z5qpd6I (an astronomer friend thought I'd be able to identify the satellite amongst all the meteors, which was sweet... I think it's a bit after the 2 minute mark)

Aside note: I didn't imagine one could see / film that much meteors during the night in some city. If I remember correctly, I saw 2 or 3 my whole life, and was driving at some road.