Study on the affect of Starlink networks

[strongmanmike]

Not sure if this has been posted already but it is an interesting read and attempts to analyse and quantify the detrimental effects predicted on astronomical observations by massive super constellations of internet satellites that are coming to a sky near all of us.

Impact of satellite constellations on astronomical observations with ESO telescopes in the visible and infrared domains (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339724427_Impact_of_satellite_const ellations_on_astronomical_observati ons_with_ESO_telescopes_in_the_visi ble_and_infrared_domains)

Seems to suggest that while overall the affect of many 10's of 1000's of low earth orbit satellites, on most narrow field astronomical observations, using current commonly used methods and instruments, will be minimal to moderate, wide field and survey astronomy however will likely be more seriously affected.

The paper is a year old now, so perhaps things have been further analysed but I couldn't help feeling that it had an air of almost wishful thinking, "it isn't as bad as we might think" at least based on current detection methods and typical fields of view used in astronomy at the moment?

To me, having around 2hrs of full darkness, every clear night, infiltrated, to any obvious degree, by a problematic man-made effect and on a formerly pristine environment, is not something to disregard as meah, business as usual and just a sign of progress. Without some effective careful guidelines around the development of such massive networks, it doesn't seem too alarmist, to be very worried that it could easily get way out of hand in the future....

Mike

[Bart]

Its already out of hand, Mike. $$ beats science any day. If it was in hand still they would never have been launched. It also seems to be another human penchant, littering every environment they have.

Getting back into my box now...

[multiweb]

Exactly. A pristine environment is a right for everyone. That's not progress. Progress is something that improves people's life. Makes them happier and healthier. This is just growth. Only benefits a few.

[glend]

A pristine environment is not a right for anyone; there are plenty of examples right here on the surface of the Earth. If you want pristine then you need to go back to a time before humans. History shows us it is human nature to exploit their environment, natural resources, etc.
Starlink is a new step, and benefits many (Not a few, and certainly potentially more than the few humans that engage in amateur astronomy), as the take up has spread across the world. Many early adopters have never had access to broadband internet, or even basic services (due to the high cost of terrestrial service provision). It provides global coverage at sea, in the air, with little latency. Elon is on record as stating that Starlink profits will help pay for Mars colonisation costs. Now perhaps Elon is not the best person to be in charge of Mars' future develoment, but his strategy has merit.

[multiweb]

We're talking about a guy who likes his gadgets and chucked a hissy fit because he wanted a submarine toy to go rescue those kids trapped in a cave and got told off by the adults rescuing them against the clock.

There is logic in spending resources, time and money to colonize a place where it's -60c at the equator on a good day and so inhospitable that the practicality of setting a colony there is regarded as a farce at best by the most respected astronauts who rightly pointed out that we're not even close to settle on the moon yet.

So as far as strategy goes there's none. Big kid's dream. Merit? Fixing earth first would have a lot more merit.

[LewisM]

C'est plus que parfait! Brava Marc.



But he makes pretty rockets that go up and come down (sometimes) - eye candy for the easily impressed. Parachute does the same with less difficulty and less showmanship. Like a pencil vs a Fisher space pen...

[RB]

Hey....
I've got one of those Fisher Space Pens.... somewhere....
Try finding a sharpener in space....

:mad2: :lol:

[AdamJL]

I'm no fan of the impact of these things on our hobby, but to be clear here, StarLink can benefit a lot more than a few. Offering access to internet to everyone around the globe is a fine thing.
I wish the company had thought more about impacts in other areas (or cared more, certainly), but also don't doubt the potential positive impact this product will have on people around the world.

[multiweb]

A lot of people in the near future are going to need clean water and food. Not a Facebook account :)

Look as Mike pointed out the effect might be minimal for narrow field in research. It's just the bulldozer attitude Bezos, Musk, Branson and whoever follow in their step have. These guys are in it for one thing. Profit. NASA does science and answers questions on a budget.

[AdamJL]

Not arguing against the attitudes of the corporations doing this. There's just much more to the internet than Facebook ;)
The internet might very well be able to manage the issues of clean water and food as well; remote farming and crop management all linked via satellite. Monitoring of river courses and floods in unreachable areas, etc.
Smarter people than me will come up with ingenious ways to use it.

[multiweb]

The internet is an energy and resources hog. 70% entertainment. It's not only a nuisance up there with the satellite constellations. It's also all the ground based infrastructure and devices needed to stream and deliver all the data.

I like the 5G argument of the old lady in the Australian outback needing urgent treatment made possible remotely with an ultra fast live connection by a surgeon operating based in Sydney. That's 0.0001% of what the internet is used for today. Would be so much cheaper to have a good surgeon living in a town nearby, equip him and and pay him well.

[astroron]

Something I saw on "Nature" today.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/03/study-finds-nowhere-earth-safe-satellite-light-pollution?utm_source=Nature+Briefin g&utm_campaign=94e7f02b4f-briefing-dy-20210330&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c9dfd39373-94e7f02b4f-43849317
Cheers:thumbsup:

[astroron]

I love it when one or more of Musk's rockets goes Kaboooom!:love:
Cheers:thumbsup:

[RB]

What planet is that Ron?

:eyepop:

[astroron]

Unfortunately it is good old planet Earth, Andrew.:(
Cheers:thumbsup:

[AdamJL]

Nothing wrong with the internet being geared towards entertainment. There are always edge cases that will make a real impact on people's lives. The old lady in the Australian outback is one of many scenarios you could add up.

If you want a good surgeon to live in a town nearby, you have to build the infrastructure out there for people to want to move to... shops, roads, utilities.... which also includes internet. And building infrastructure (hi, concrete) is one of the most energy intensive things we do as a species.

[multiweb]

Of course but maybe a less wasteful and energy intensive form of entertainment. Been in IT for over 20 years and saw the changes first hand. Everything is geared towards volume and monetizing traffic now. It will take a radical change in thinking to get out of there as long as the demand is there. So not really hopeful :) The night sky will be peppered.


That's correct. But there are a lot of country towns going empty because people moved to cities. I suspect the infrastructure in most part is already there but vacant.

[strongmanmike]

Can make a lot of bricks and concrete and stuff for construction from mining coral reefs, so in reality we do need some enterprising business people to start bankrolling the nibbling of our Great Barrier Reef, so we can build more stuff, particularly out in country towns, to attract doctors there. The reef is huge and it won't affect people that much, certainly not to start with anyway, and they do need doctors in many country towns...:shrug:

Mike

[forrestwhite]

It's worth noting that the American Astronomical Society (AAS), which hosted the Satellite Constellation workshop, is already working with SpaceX to address this issue. For its part, SpaceX is also partnering with the National Radio Astronomy Laboratory (NROA) and the Green Bank Observatory (GBO) to develop methods to mitigate the negative impact of Starlink satellites.

[astroron]

To little to late in my opinion.
The horse has well and truly bolted.
We have had nearly 60 years of putting Junk
up in space,and that is going to be expedited
in the coming years.
What Musk Et Al are proposing is only window dressing.
Nothing is going to get in the way of the mighty dollar,
or in the case of the Chinese and the Russians, and in a lesser
case India, pursuit of power.
Cheers:thumbsup:

[N1]

Apart from the fact that it's cluttering near-earth space (is this really the best solution for communication that humans have managed to come up with in 2021???), I see certain potential vulnerabilities with this system, if it turns out to be something that communities of even countries actually depend on. To them, a Carrington or Kessler type event (the latter could even be brought about intentionally) wouldn't present such good prospects.

[DamienB]

I have seen the starlinks drift across and through Acrux on a clear night, usually around 9pm or so. Whilst it's great to marvel at human technology advances, I start to think about all the unused junk thats out there.


Only recently I heard an interview on ABC adelaide with a lady who is classed as a Space Architect. She is studying the junk thats there. What I can't understand is why we can't retrieve it?


Yes i am aware they are moving quickly, but with say SpaceX's technology and money, develop orbiting satellites that can be controlled to clean up the junk, somehow gather and return to earth, or bundle up and push it through atmosphere to burn up? 🤷*♂️🤷*♀️


Surely at some point the junk up there is a huge danger to future projects. Aka launching rockets, commercial flights into orbit etc. Imagine hearing in 20 years "25 people died on a virgin galactic flight, it was believed they collided with the left overs of an AOL satellite from 1996"


Damien

[lazjen]

Money, it is as simple as that. Who pays for it? How do you change the economic incentives to get everyone to do the right thing and not "pollute"?



Check out Kessler Syndrome: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome