|
Hmm yes!!!
A recent image I produced indicated how the satellite issue has changed over the last 10 years. Images 10 years ago might have had 10 or so frames from 100 that would have satellite trails. Usually those would be seen near sunset or sunrise. Recently stacking 4 stacks of 85 frames each I found that nearly 85% of those frames had one or more satellite trails in them. Most were faint but there were a significant proportion that were bright.
Now, data rejection will currently rid the individual frames of the trails as none of these trails lay on top of each other and so other frames make up for the area rejected. Lots of frames means the problem goes away.
However, this is with around 8000-9000 satellites in orbit. Once it gets to 100K I am not sure how things will work. I think though it will mean imaging will need to be done over longer durations, therefore I would be expecting to go from around 20 hours of integration on average for images to 50 hours on average. That might not suit most in the imaging game. Perhaps that might be good for remote hosting facilities, but it might drive a lot of setup each night imagers out of the hobby. That will be bad for the imaging industry I imagine.
Given that no one who makes the approvals to launch satellites really thinks this is a major problem or could become a major problem, I expect that the vain will happily have an internet connection anywhere on the earth so they can post selfies in remote locations. That is until a rather large piece of rock crashes into the Earth which might have been detected had there not been 100K worth of satellites blocking the view. Then something might be done about it. That really is the story of human reaction to problems. Try to fix it after the fact.
|