I’m just leaving this link here again: https://www.darksky.org/new-satellite-study/
Starlink Satellites Tracker
91–100 of 147 posts
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They could theatrically also launch fewer, but put them all the way into their final orbit I wonder if they might choose to do this so the sats keep more of their onboard fuel, and will be able to keep themselves in orbit a bit longer before the inevitable re-entry burn up.
I'd guess it is more efficient to have them boost themselves, so that they act as an additional rocket stage. (and so not need the delta V to elevate and then de-elevate starship's orbit.)
There is certainly someone doing the optimization problem for the orbit insertion and fuel loads and picking the right set of tradeoffs.
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#93I honestly can't believe Starlink is allowed to do this. It's an absolute travesty, polluting the view of the sky for ALL people on Earth to an absolutely unprecedented degree, for profit of an American corporation. Absolutely despise it, wish all countries of the world came together and demanded the deployments to stop.
In my opinion they're improving the night sky. Seeing man-made objects out there is inspiring evidence of what man is capable of.
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#94SpaceX Launches 60 Starlink Satellites on Falcon 9: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPMqJki82KQ
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know that these sats will affect many telescopic observations, but that's been happening a long time. I understand that this interference will end up being several times more frequent. However, for many years, satellite streaks have been algorithmically removed from observations. It's possible that those algorithms will need to be upgraded. That's a small price to pay in exchange for robust and high speed Internet…
I have a Starlink deposit down and I still have my doubts about the merits of that trade-off. My reasoning is amateur astronomy is ruined anyhow so I may as well be able to stream Netflix on more devices and as a side benefit tech monopolies will be able to further extend their influence. Which, frankly, feels rather sordid. And in any event Starlink is nothing compared to the assholes planning satellite billboards.
The real good that will come out of Starlink isn't from people like you and I, it'll be from people very poor countries and regions.
The money you and I put into it are bootstrapping bringing Internet access to hundreds of millions who would otherwise not get it.
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#96More detailed info about the satellite constellations, ground stations, and a map:
https://starlink.sx/
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#97We also have a coverage map for Starlink: https://orbitalindex.com/feature/starlink-coverage/
Perhaps you can also give filters for "on station" satellites from all. Satellites not yet in station are not really giving coverage yet ?
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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]
What exactly do you need a citation for? The starlink antenna is a $499, and the subscription is $99 a month. That's extremely expensive for internet, I'd only consider this if there was literally nothing else available. So yes, it will be bought by wealthy people who live out in the sticks, because if you're not from a wealthy nation and quite comfortable financially yourself, then $99/month is crazy high. I guess c…
> The starlink antenna is a $499, and the subscription is $99 a month.
So your whole argument on pricing is based on a beta product with limited availability currently. Because prices have never dropped significantly once the product has actually reached mass market adoption?
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#99Some friends said they saw it go over my town last night but I missed it. I’m stoked there’s a tool to track it.
There are over a thousand up there. You can see individual satellites now just by looking at the clear sky at night for a while, you'll find some. I see a couple of them almost every night. Someone told me there was a line of them last night, probably from the most recent launch, but I couldn't find them.
Awesome. I was going to get my son a telescope for this sort of thing.
The coolest satellite sighting I’ve had was when I was up on Mt. Hood a few summers ago and could see it really well. There was a meteor shower going on too.
Large mountains and infinite space are humbling in a good way.
That night was quite a journey. :-)
Re: Starlink Satellites Tracker
#100Earlier 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 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).
What about when competing services launch, as they will if this is successful? What are the total numbers going to look like if EU, Russia, China, Japan, and India all launch starlink services?