String of satellites baffles residents, bugs astronomers

[dalton99a]

Last edited Sun May 9, 2021, 11:56 AM - Edit history (1)

https://apnews.com/article/tx-state-wire-spacex-business-technology-science-9c2a06a4868408043ccb472372a0d8dd

String of satellites baffles residents, bugs astronomers
By CLAUDIA LAUER


In this photo taken May 6, 2021, with a long exposure, a string of SpaceX StarLink satellites passes over an old stone house near Florence, Kan. The train of lights was actually a series of relatively low-flying satellites launched by Elon Musk's SpaceX as part of its Starlink internet service earlier this week. (AP Photo/Reed Hoffmann, File)

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — A string of lights that lobbed across the night sky in parts of the U.S. on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday had some people wondering if a fleet of UFOs was coming, but it had others— mostly amateur stargazers and professional astronomers— lamenting the industrialization of space.

The train of lights was actually a series of relatively low-flying satellites launched by Elon Musk’s SpaceX as part of its Starlink internet service earlier this week. Callers swamped TV stations from Texas to Wisconsin reporting the lights and musing about UFOs.

“The way you can tell they are Starlink satellites is they are like a string of pearls, these lights travelling in the same basic orbit, one right after the other,” said Dr. Richard Fienberg, press officer for the American Astronomical Society.

This month, SpaceX has already launched dozens of satellites. It is all part of a plan to bridge the digital divide and bring internet access to underserved areas of the world, with SpaceX tentatively scheduled to launch another 120 satellites later in the month. Overall, the company has sent about 1,500 satellites into orbit and has asked for permission to launch thousands more.


(Photo by David Wong, Grass Valley, Calif.)


(Photo taken by Marco Langbroek in 2019)

============================================================================

More sightings reported last week:


Starlink over Hedgesville, W. Va.


Starlink over Beaver Dam Lake, Wisc.


Starlink over Punxsutawney, Penn.


Starlink over Melbourne, Australia


Starlink Ground Station in Wisconsin


Starlink Ground Station in Alaska


Starlink Ground Station in New Zealand


Starlink Ground Station in Germany

[Earth-shine]

1. I saw this a few months ago in the night sky from my South Florida backyard.

There were 14 in the sky equally spaced moving rapidly in a line.

There was a cold beauty to it.

It was way cool to see.

[misanthrope]

3. It won't be so cool if it gets completed

Musk has already gained approval for 12,000 of them. He wants another 30,000 on top of it.

It will completely ruin land-based astronomy and the night sky will look like it is crawling with glow worms.

[Earth-shine]

4. 14 were beautiful. 12K equals glow worms!

[Lars39]

2. An abomination.

[USALiberal]

5. Bringing Internet to everyone in the world is A wonderful thing. Also....

Space based telescopes will not have any issue.

[NickB79]

7. Space debris doesn't affect space based telescopes?

In a decade the planet's orbit will be a dangerous place for delicate instruments.

[misanthrope]

9. Sure, but think how it will inflate Musk's self-importance

We all want to sacrifice for that, right?

I can't say for sure because I've never met him but the guy strikes me as a megalomaniac.

[Happy Hoosier]

17. These are is a low orbit...

Space telescopes are in a higher orbit.

[NickB79]

18. And you need to go through the low orbit cloud of debris to get there

Give it a few decades and trying to reach high orbit will be like WW2 bombers trying to reach their targets while taking flak shells.

[Happy Hoosier]

19. The low orbit satellites...

Tend to fall back into the atmosphere. Snd can be designed to do so at the end of their service life. Earlier satellites did not consider decommissioning, but st least in the US, that mist be considered now.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

6. Fuck this guy and all his works.

[NickB79]

8. Orbital pollution is a dangerous gamble

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/spacexs-starlink-could-cause-cascades-of-space-junk/

These close encounters already occur thousands of times each year, but the sheer vastness of mega constellations such as Starlink will change the game, resulting in an estimated 67,000 annual collision-avoidance maneuvers if all of them are launched. As Earth orbit becomes jam-packed with satellites, the risk increases. A worst-case scenario would be the Kessler syndrome, a positive feedback loop in which debris-generating collisions create more and more collisions, which in turn create more and more debris, rendering parts of Earth orbit essentially unusable.

[Blues Heron]

10. Such an incredibly bad idea for the stupidest possible reason

Everybody on the planet that wants to be online already is. And their grandmothers. But let’s kill the night sky anyway. Fuck that guy Musk.

[USALiberal]

12. So your claim is that no one who wants internet can get it? Nt

[Blues Heron]

13. I don't think we should sacrifice astronomy on the alter of "more internet"

why does the entire planet need to be covered in internet? Any idea if he's going to be charging money for all this internet or is he giving it away?

[USALiberal]

14. Space based astronomy will not be impacted and....

The new James Webb Space Telescope will not be impacted.

If no one needs satellite internet why does 5 million people want Starlink?

SpaceX now plans for 5 million Starlink customers in US, up from 1 million

https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/08/spacex-now-plans-for-5-million-starlink-customers-in-us-up-from-1-million/%3famp=1

[Blues Heron]

15. so we sacrifice ground-based astronomy for instagram?

bad swap in my opinion. There are other ways to get online besides killing astronomy.

Musk is pretty deranged, remember he attacked that cave hero in Thailand because they wouldn't use his idiotic nose cone? This madman wants to make money at the expense of humanity's need for dark skies. I would take anything he says with a few metric tons of salt.

[MineralMan]

22. Actually, that is absolutely untrue.

Not even close. Even in the United States, rural communities often do not have any broadband access. Perhaps you have it, and that's good enough for you. I don't know, but you are vastly incorrect.

And, since you are wrong about this statement, and obviously so, why should anyone pay attention to your opinions about the topic?

[Blues Heron]

23. Because most people know somethings wrong when the astronomers raise the alert

I'm with the scientists on this one, we shouldn't ruin our night skies for Musk's bottom line. Imagine 300,000 of these every night - or twice that amount. where does it stop?

[MineralMan]

25. We are concerned about different things, apparently.

I've been watching the news from India. That seems to me to be a far more pressing issue than some orbiting satellites interfering with astronomers' views. Almost 2 Billion people live in India, one of the most crowded places on the planet, and they are dying, due to unavailability of medical care.

Look up in the sky. If you do so long enough, you'll see various satellites passing overhead. I watched the International space station make a transit a couple of years ago from my parents' balcony in California. That was pretty cool. I've been watching satellites make transits since Sputnik. There are more of them to see now. However, they do not dominate the view in any way, nor will these satellites being discussed.

While you might possibly notice one of these strings of satellites making a transit. However, if you are actually looking, you will also see that most of the night sky is completely free of such things. Even 300,000 of them will not disrupt your view significantly, nor will it disrupt the view of astronomers.

These days, most serious astronomical observations are made by equipment in high orbits around this planet and by craft that has left Earth orbit. That's where we're making new discovery. Earth-based observations can easily filter out the noise of low-orbit satellites.

Again, you seem to have a very narrow focus when it comes to this. There are far larger problems we need to solve than this. You made an incorrect statement regarding people's access to broadband connections. What else do you not know, or believe incorrectly? Think about that for a while. That's my recommendation.

[onethatcares]

11. gaud damn capitalism

and Musk.

I don't remember him asking me if he could throw some lights across my section of sky and you know once his 58 gazillion sattelites are in space he's not going to donate free internet to anyone EVER. There is an ROI that's expected.

[Red Mountain]

16. This post brought to you via Starlink

Good article here:

https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/starlink-satellites-fainter-but-still-visible/


Another factor that limits the adverse impact of Starlink satellites is that, because of their low orbit, they are not all reflecting sunlight during the darkest part of the night. Furthermore, Earth shadowing makes satellites less visible in the eastern sky early at night and less visible in the west before dawn. So, theoretically anyway, observations can be scheduled by time and by sky region in order to avoid satellites.

Starlink satellites will continue to be a distraction to observers for now, but the significantly dimmer VisorSats represent a marked improvement. It remains to be seen if and how other satellite companies will take note and follow suit.

[uncle ray]

20. people who haven't seen them should know they do not look like the photos above.

we saw a few trains while camping this weekend. they are as dim as the dimmer stars. not terribly obtrusive, and you will not generally notice them. that said, i do have mixed feelings about the whole idea.

[Blues Heron]

21. this is just the beginning though

they want to do tens or hundreds of thousands more, so multiply what you see now by that amount. There's got to be another way to hook people up.

[marie999]

24. Are they small enough to burn and not hit the Earth?

[MineralMan]

26. Yes.