Why is there a need for a starlink-specific tracker when there are plenty of general satellite trackers that also include all the starlink satellites?
Starlink Satellites Tracker
61–70 of 147 posts
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#62It's interesting to see so many of these satellites are listed as "Bright" in my area. Before the launches, the HN crowd promised repeatedly that nobody would be able to see these satellites and they would not change the night sky at all, and that that looking up in wonder is only something that old people and luddites do, because nothing is more important than global always-on sacred holy internet access.
They are only bright for an initial period after launch.
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#63One of the coolest starlink specific trackers is starlink.sx.
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the same argument as for a carbon tax. It's imperfect, because the benefit only flows to the local government (when the commons is globally shared, as you point out), but it's the best practical solution since it broadly aligns incentives with that of the commons. Your solution to simply deprive rural communities/poor countries of internet access is a non-starter . What you're ignoring is that the positive exter…
But Starlink isn't, wasn't, and never will be "for providing internet to poorer countries". It's always going to be first and foremost about selling internet to people in wealthy countries in areas without good local internet options. Are we really pretending that people in "poor countries" can afford the cost of the equipment and the subscription? Or that Elon Musk is doing this as some kind of charity? The main pro…
>It's always going to be first and foremost about selling internet to people in wealthy countries in areas without good local internet options.
[citation needed]
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#65We are polluting our night skies and dark places.
I'm far more concerned about atmospheric particles (as measured by PM2.5, etc) and air pollution than I am about satellites.
Go visit New Delhi or Lahore in mid winter and give us your subjective opinion of the air quality.
https://www.google.com/search?q=delhi+air+pollution&client=u...
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Basically, the constellation's effect on the night sky is proportional to the number of launches in the last month, not the total number in orbit. For the major brightness issues sure, but they are not invisible or undetectable while in operation. Surely the effects are proportional to both the recent launches and the whole size. I think it's a bit early to dismiss the whole sky effect of multiple Starlink-style co…
I'm reminded of Earth orbit from the film Wall-E for some reason.
That's distinctly completely impossible in this case.
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#67While I won't subscribe (I have fiber), I am excited about what this might mean for the future. It would amazing to improve the technology enough to replace 4G/5G dongles. It sounds like the technology relies on being in a somewhat fixed position though.
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#68For the record, these satellites are inserted in groups of 60 at half their orbital height. They have onboard thrusters to boost up to the final operational orbit. There is high atmospheric drag at lower altitudes, so they deploy their solar panels horizontally during this boost period, which usually lasts less than a month. These horizontal panels reflect the sun just after sunset and just before dawn. Once they are…
>Basically, the constellation's effect on the night sky is proportional to the number of launches in the last month, not the total number in orbit.
For what it's worth, in order for the constellation to reach steady state the number of launches in the last month will need to be proportional to the total # of orbit. So if the constellation has 42,000 satellites and the satellites last 10 years on average (IMO that's an optimistic lifespan), you need to launch around 350/month just to maintain the size of the constellation.
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious if you say the same thing about airplanes (which aren't exclusively American either). They are also quite noisy.
Think about it - when Starlink is fully operational there won't be a single place left on earth without several of their satellites always in view. The same definitely cannot be said about planes. Also countries retain full sovereignty to decide whether to allow planes flying above them - same cannot be said about satellites. Countries which cannot even use Starlink are having their night sky polluted by it.
Poland ceded that sovereignty when they signed the Outer Space Treaty. Poland CAN use Starlink, SpaceX just hasn't offered service there yet (they only recently translated their documentation into French and support is still only in English). The service is still in beta as things are still in development. Service is available in the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and Germany.
Edit: Apparently they just added service in France today as well.
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#70For the record, these satellites are inserted in groups of 60 at half their orbital height. They have onboard thrusters to boost up to the final operational orbit. There is high atmospheric drag at lower altitudes, so they deploy their solar panels horizontally during this boost period, which usually lasts less than a month. These horizontal panels reflect the sun just after sunset and just before dawn. Once they are…
>Basically, the constellation's effect on the night sky is proportional to the number of launches in the last month, not the total number in orbit. For what it's worth, in order for the constellation to reach steady state the number of launches in the last month will need to be proportional to the total # of orbit. So if the constellation has 42,000 satellites and the satellites last 10 years on average (IMO that's a…
By that time they'll also have a launch vehicle capable of launching around 300 satellites in a single launch.
Additionally, 42,000 was a worst case for the number needed and only if things go exceedingly well with the service. I think people quote that number too much when in reality there's likely to be under 5000 (from SpaceX at least).