7 ms·

Looking at the constellation of satellites, is anyone else concerned about Starlink being allowed by a single nation’s agency to fill the sky, which belongs to

by pb060 2y ago

Looking at the constellation of satellites, is anyone else concerned about Starlink being allowed by a single nation’s agency to fill the sky, which belongs to no one or to everyone, with their satellites?

DocTomoe 2y ago
Actually I will be more concerned once other nations start to set up their own Starlinks. Kessler Syndrome is a question of when, not if, by that point.
whiteboardr 2y ago
It’s an appalling situation IMHO - watching the lack of regulations for “space litter” and ignorance of one man combined ruining earths orbit for generations to come is a disgrace. I get the point of providing global connectivity and it might be useful, the implications don’t make up for it though. Scientific research should be the only reason anyone should be allowed to put human made objects into space. Musk shooting a damn car into space just for the fun of it should have been a warning for everyone - seeing the majority treating it as a “cool” thing to do just shows how much mire education about space should be done. Oh well.
- perilunar 2y ago
  > Scientific research should be the only reason anyone should be allowed to put human made objects into space You don't think communications and navigation satellites should exist? What about weather sats?
- martyvis 2y ago
  Clearly you don't understand Elon's Starlink. If they did nothing from today literally every satellite will re-enter and burn up of it's own accord within 5 years - not generations. They have to actively boost it keep it in orbit and counter the drag for the atmosphere. ( Which is quite different from most other satellites out there)
  - whiteboardr 2y ago
    I know. What I’m saying is that this is here to stay and once fuel for keeping them in orbit is depleted they’ll be replaced - hence that whole mesh won’t go away.
    - scrumper 2y ago
      I agree with you in terms of how it feels. I haven't yet made up my mind about the balance of benefits and drawbacks. When I get cross about them I try to remember that I've never really minded airplanes crossing my path when stargazing and they're a lot brighter and more distracting. And I think I'd like to keep my righteous anger powder dry for when some gigantic asshole tries to show adverts in the night sky. It requires active investment to maintain the contsellation, so at least the null case is that they'll all burn up within a few years if SpaceX fails. (And that's something that I think even many fervent Elon-haters don't particularly want to see: given the choice between betting the next 50 years of access to space on Starliner or Falcon and Starship, I know which I'd pick.)
  - teamonkey 2y ago
    "Potential Ozone Depletion From Satellite Demise During Atmospheric Reentry in the Era of Mega-Constellations" https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280 https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL10...
perilunar 2y ago
No. Starlink isn't 'filling the sky' — there's plenty of space left for everyone else, and they're not preventing anyone else from sending up satellites. Also, the benefits of Starlink's satellites are immense.
- timthorn 2y ago
  Plenty of room for other satellites, maybe - but they are having a real impact on astronomy.
  - perilunar 2y ago
    Which they have taken steps to mitigate. But in any case, the long-term benefits to astronomy of having cheap heavy launch capability (which SpaceX is funding through Starlink) will far outweigh the short-term costs of a few satellite streaks on images.
    - edf13 2y ago
      Not when any home/hobby based astronomy is off the cards.
      - krisoft 2y ago
        Is it off the cards?
      - elsonrodriguez 2y ago
        I’m sure even in the fictional worlds of Star Trek and Expanse there’s still someone in their back yard with a telescope, despite the skies being filled with not just satellites, but the constant traffic of space ships and the oppressive presence of megastructures.
- edhelas 2y ago
  Ah ok, so if the benefits are immense looks like the rest doesn't matter then. Hopefully that benefit/risk was decided democratically and publicly and not based on some assumption by a handful of people online.
moffkalast 2y ago
Tragedy of the commons I guess, but it's not exactly a new idea [0]. As long as they keep control of those satelites, keep them in high decay low altitude orbits and are able to deorbit them if necessary it's not exactly a huge problem, unlike random ASAT weapon tests or collisions that litter tiny untrackable particles that will stay there for centuries and rip through anything like butter. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford
1970-01-01 2y ago
That horse left the barn years ago and spends its time snuggling with "We Respect Your Privacy" Try the opposite take. Stars are extremely boring both with and without a telescope, and planets are entirely uninteresting without it. ISS aside, there's finally something interesting and dynamic to look up and admire with our eyeballs.
dsq 2y ago
Singling out starlink is unfair. Satellites are so obviously advantageous that it is a sure bet that the sky will be filled with them very soon. Chinese, European, and others.
itishappy 2y ago
Nah, I've always loved watching satellites. I'm concerned about light pollution.
forgot-im-old 2y ago
The main concern about reflecting light are from astronomers in remote places. The main concern for the rest of humanity is that Starlink is for nuclear war: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1dgyujd/comment/l8tgf79/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1dgyujd/comment/l8...

by pb060 2y ago

DocTomoe 2y ago

Actually I will be more concerned once other nations start to set up their own Starlinks. Kessler Syndrome is a question of when, not if, by that point.

whiteboardr 2y ago

It’s an appalling situation IMHO - watching the lack of regulations for “space litter” and ignorance of one man combined ruining earths orbit for generations to come is a disgrace. I get the point of providing global connectivity and it might be useful, the implications don’t make up for it though. Scientific research should be the only reason anyone should be allowed to put human made objects into space. Musk shooting a damn car into space just for the fun of it should have been a warning for everyone - seeing the majority treating it as a “cool” thing to do just shows how much mire education about space should be done. Oh well.

perilunar 2y ago
> Scientific research should be the only reason anyone should be allowed to put human made objects into space You don't think communications and navigation satellites should exist? What about weather sats?
martyvis 2y ago
Clearly you don't understand Elon's Starlink. If they did nothing from today literally every satellite will re-enter and burn up of it's own accord within 5 years - not generations. They have to actively boost it keep it in orbit and counter the drag for the atmosphere. ( Which is quite different from most other satellites out there)
- whiteboardr 2y ago
  I know. What I’m saying is that this is here to stay and once fuel for keeping them in orbit is depleted they’ll be replaced - hence that whole mesh won’t go away.
  - scrumper 2y ago
    I agree with you in terms of how it feels. I haven't yet made up my mind about the balance of benefits and drawbacks. When I get cross about them I try to remember that I've never really minded airplanes crossing my path when stargazing and they're a lot brighter and more distracting. And I think I'd like to keep my righteous anger powder dry for when some gigantic asshole tries to show adverts in the night sky. It requires active investment to maintain the contsellation, so at least the null case is that they'll all burn up within a few years if SpaceX fails. (And that's something that I think even many fervent Elon-haters don't particularly want to see: given the choice between betting the next 50 years of access to space on Starliner or Falcon and Starship, I know which I'd pick.)
- teamonkey 2y ago
  "Potential Ozone Depletion From Satellite Demise During Atmospheric Reentry in the Era of Mega-Constellations" https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL109280 https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GL10...

perilunar 2y ago

No. Starlink isn't 'filling the sky' — there's plenty of space left for everyone else, and they're not preventing anyone else from sending up satellites. Also, the benefits of Starlink's satellites are immense.

timthorn 2y ago
Plenty of room for other satellites, maybe - but they are having a real impact on astronomy.
- perilunar 2y ago
  Which they have taken steps to mitigate. But in any case, the long-term benefits to astronomy of having cheap heavy launch capability (which SpaceX is funding through Starlink) will far outweigh the short-term costs of a few satellite streaks on images.
  - edf13 2y ago
    Not when any home/hobby based astronomy is off the cards.
    - krisoft 2y ago
      Is it off the cards?
    - elsonrodriguez 2y ago
      I’m sure even in the fictional worlds of Star Trek and Expanse there’s still someone in their back yard with a telescope, despite the skies being filled with not just satellites, but the constant traffic of space ships and the oppressive presence of megastructures.
edhelas 2y ago
Ah ok, so if the benefits are immense looks like the rest doesn't matter then. Hopefully that benefit/risk was decided democratically and publicly and not based on some assumption by a handful of people online.

moffkalast 2y ago

Tragedy of the commons I guess, but it's not exactly a new idea [0]. As long as they keep control of those satelites, keep them in high decay low altitude orbits and are able to deorbit them if necessary it's not exactly a huge problem, unlike random ASAT weapon tests or collisions that litter tiny untrackable particles that will stay there for centuries and rip through anything like butter. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_West_Ford

1970-01-01 2y ago

That horse left the barn years ago and spends its time snuggling with "We Respect Your Privacy" Try the opposite take. Stars are extremely boring both with and without a telescope, and planets are entirely uninteresting without it. ISS aside, there's finally something interesting and dynamic to look up and admire with our eyeballs.

dsq 2y ago

Singling out starlink is unfair. Satellites are so obviously advantageous that it is a sure bet that the sky will be filled with them very soon. Chinese, European, and others.

itishappy 2y ago

Nah, I've always loved watching satellites. I'm concerned about light pollution.

forgot-im-old 2y ago

The main concern about reflecting light are from astronomers in remote places. The main concern for the rest of humanity is that Starlink is for nuclear war: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1dgyujd/comment/l8tgf79/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1dgyujd/comment/l8...