Jump to content

stargazine_ep44_banner.thumb.jpg.6153c4d39ed5a64b7d8af2d3d6061f61.jpg

Recommended Posts

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanocallaghan/2020/07/31/amazon-is-going-to-add-3000-more-satellites-into-earths-orbit--and-people-are-not-happy/?sh=22f024d77628

WHAT? Excuse me? I have only recently found out about this, and i cannot believe it. To quote Stargazerslounge member Baldyman "I wonder what we will fill up with junk first. The oceans or the atmosphere?"

How dare anyone be given permission to do this? Is there something i can sign to try and stop it? I don't know who i am more furious at, Amazon or the FCC. I know this was announced a while back, but i am still making this article regardless. Please let me know what i can possibly do to try and stop it.

My sorrow cannot be expressed fully. If polluting our own planet wasn't enough... ugh. I know you probably have all heard it before, but i felt i must put something. Thank you for your time. :(

Edited by Goldenmole
  • Like 4
  • Sad 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I, like many others feel the same... I saw a huge stream of those Musk satellites go up last year - I did throw a stone in the general direction but I think I missed... I also threw a few choice words that way too... 

I guess there will be petitions online somewhere, but once its been approved there's very little to be done... 

This sort of thing can be soul destroying if you think about it too much... I do a lot of beach cleaning and it never fails to amaze me how quickly the plastic bottle tops regroup...

Mark

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

you wonder at what point will they find they are unable to launch any new missions out to deep space or the moon with the ever increasing garbage in orbit...

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was “enjoying” seeing the streams go over, but they seem to be harder to see now... as time went on seeing predicted bright ones from Heavens Above got harder. So it seems their plans to make them less visible by design and flight orientation are working, how well will have to be for others to say. 
 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Private corporations for their own private profit are destroying the science of astronomy and the night sky right before our own eyes. According to law of the jungle. Without any proper worldwide discussion. We don't even know what other environmental negative effects do these satellites have on the biosphere. I am wondering where this world is going..

Edited by runway77
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking though it is, this is rather old news. The FCC granted Space-X permission to launch over 12,000 satellites back in 2018. The condition with that permission was that they were all up there in operation by 2024.

 

 

Edited by John
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Should it not be the case that a decision to effectively pollute Earth’s orbit with thousands of pieces of junk, thereby threatening the enjoyment of space by a worldwide population, be made by a worldwide organization rather than made by an organization in one particular country?....

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jiggy 67 said:

Should it not be the case that a decision to effectively pollute Earth’s orbit with thousands of pieces of junk, thereby threatening the enjoyment of space by a worldwide population, be made by a worldwide organization rather than made by an organization in one particular country?....

I couldn't agree with you more. Respect.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect Amazon needs to pollute Earth  orbit with thousands of satellites so they can pollute our skies with thousands of drones delivering parcels containing toys for the dog etc!

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://spacenews.com/spacex-submits-paperwork-for-30000-more-starlink-satellites/

The submissions for approval seem to go to the ITU which is part of the United Nations. From their webpage:

"The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) is the United Nations specialized agency for information and communication technologies – ICTs.

Founded in 1865 to facilitate international connectivity in communications networks, we allocate global radio spectrum and satellite orbits, develop the technical standards that ensure networks and technologies seamlessly interconnect, and strive to improve access to ICTs to underserved communities worldwide.  Every time you make a phonecall via the mobile, access the Internet or send an email, you are benefitting from the work of ITU. 

ITU is committed to connecting all the world's people – wherever they live and whatever their means. Through our work, we protect and support everyone's right to communicate."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, theropod said:

Re the above: those rights are apparently superseded the rights of others to enjoy the night sky.

Global communications produces a lot more £'s / $'s revenue than enjoying the night sky does.

I'm not happy about it at all as an amateur astronomer of course but these are the realities that drive global decision making whether we like them or not, I'm afraid.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My reading of the article posted by @John is a bit different from John’s. I’m sure it’s far more complicated than any of us could understand but my understanding of that article is that the ITU control frequency’s and the “technical stuff”

The ITU, a United Nations entity, coordinates spectrum at the international level for satellite operators to prevent signal interference and spectrum hogging. National regulators submit filing on behalf of their country’s satellite operators.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me cynical but with things like this I don't believe any petition can/will put a stop to it. Mainly down to the amount of money involved.....money talks as the old saying goes - rightly or wrongly.

As I said me being cynical!

Is a disgrace though and what will it do to our hobby!? :(

Edited by Jonny_H
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I think general light pollution is far worse. These satellites really only affect long exposure astro photography. Having the odd satellite go through your field of view when you're doing visual astronomy isn't a huge issue. 

Shops and offices, not to mention government/council buildings leaving their lights on all night; poor/ill directed street and security lighting, affect not only astronomers, but humans in general; not to mention the massive detrimental affect it has on insects and animals. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Musk and Co. have a Wild West attitude towards space: grab what you can, while you can. It’s free! Musk said that he would like to die on Mars. It’s certainly bleak enough.
Astrophysicists are expressing a genuine concern about orbital  space clutter, with regard to its effects on both optical and radio astronomy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember as a child in early 60s being shown a daily newspaper (very small) entry telling us when and where to look for what was (I think) a high altitude reflective weather balloon passing over.
One of very few objects that moved in the night sky. I think there may have been two of these ballons?

About 10 years ago I invited a few friends around to watch the August Perseids show. The intention being to have a list of satellite passes as the 'warm up' act before the meteor show got going around midnight.
I think there were something like 80 satellites that were visual or small binos brightness over 2-3 hours.
As it happens, the cloud makers were working that night and we only saw the police helicopter nearby🥴

That is one illustration of how things have changed in my lifetime.

Another illustration (refered to in earlier posts) is plastics pollution. Yes it is bad. But at least we are thinking about it, and actually doing something about it. Too little, yes. But we are starting.
Going back to the 60s. Nothing (apart from scrap metal) was recycled. Most rubbish went on the fire, or in a bin. Yes we had less plastic packaging and plastic products. But recycling was all but zero.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Socram
      Hi everyone,
      This is my first post in SGL and I must say I'm really excited about joining this wonderful community and I must thank you all for all the help and advice provided here.
      I recently bought a Skywatcher Heritage 130 as my first scope. I have a couple of (weird) questions and I would really appreciate if you could answer them:
      First of all, is there a correct way of handling this telescope (rotating and tilting) while looking at the sky? I'm asking this because sometimes I find myself grabbing it from the back of the tube where the screws are to tilt it, and I'm afraid this can move the adjusting screws and make me collimate the mirrors more frequently. Also is it OK to rotate it by grabbing the extension frame or can this also misalign the secondary mirror? Sorry for this questions but since the design of this scope is so "open" it got me thinking; The scope came with the locking screws really loose. When I say loose I mean that whenever I touch them accidentally they move a lot and when I move the scope from one place to another I can feel them shaking. Is this OK? I've been observing Venus quite a lot, but I find it really difficult to clearly see it's phases and disc without fuzziness. I'm observing from my balcony with clear skies but I live in a very light polluted area. Also I've been mainly observing it between 28º and 20º altitude (used Stellarium to get these values), except for one time when I tried to observe it before being completely dark and I was able to see it at ~38º altitude. This was actually the time where I could see the disc with more detail and very little fuzziness. Under these conditions is this normal or am I doing something wrong? During my observation sessions, I can occasionally see some objects moving fast on my field of view but I can follow them when using my 25mm eyepiece. They are like faint stars (some brighter than others) moving in a straight line trajectory. What could they be? Satellites? Is there any good source of satellite information so I can confirm these sightings when I have them? I will leave here my first photos of the moon taken a couple of weeks ago with the telescope using the 25mm and 10mm pieces that came with it, a lunar filter and my Nokia 7 plus (handheld). I know they suck but it was an achievement for me that made me really happy


      Sorry for the long boring questions.
      Thanks!
    • By Some Dude With A Mak- Cass
      so the other night i was setting up my scope, and i saw the weirdest thing in the northeastern sky. it was a fast- moving, flashing(?) object about 3- 4 degrees above the horizon. it went from the northeast to the southeast in about 3 seconds, then vanished out of sight. i didn't get a picture, my camera was still in its bag and i didn't even think of taking a pic until it was gone. now, i know this sounds like a ufo, but i don't know. i doubt it is, although i hope it was. i have seen things like this before quite a few times, but none of them at night. if it really is a ufo, id put it at a 2 on the hynek scale, for those of you who know what that is. if not, google it. its interesting. aside from the unlikely prospect of a ufo, what could it be, realistically speaking??
    • By ecuador
      Until recently Amazon allowed sellers to give free or discounted stuff in exchange for reviews, which led to some pretty bad reviewing (if you don't do 4-5 stars you won't get more free stuff), which really shows on sophisticated products like binoculars. There are binoculars listed as "30x60", at the same time can fit in your palm (60mm objectives? magic!), and they are even night vision for £4.84!! Naturally, I bought them to review them. They are really 8x21 as you could already imagine from the pics, but the worst thing about them is that "red membrane" (in other clone listings it is listed as "ruby lens"), instead of being an ANTI-reflection coating, it is like the reflective sunglasses and reflects most of red and yellow light! You get a dark blue image! Then I signed up on the aforementioned review club so that I can get a discount on one of the best seller binoculars, a "SkyGenius 10x50" at £34. At that price you can get decent binoculars, but this 5-star reviewed best seller can't give a crisp image (frustrating, you try to approach the focus point and always pass without reaching it), can't even meet its own specs - I calculated the power at about 7.5x and the effective aperture is 43mm, with a noticeably undersized prism. I added a review to warn people that it is not a "fantastic value" as the serial reviewers claim, but strangely (or suspiciously) it was down-voted out of the front page (well, if you have an Amazon.co.uk account, why not upvote this review or the other 1-2 sane ones so that they appear above the paid for reviews and help some people). At least its small prisms were collimated and there was no ruby coating... I didn't stop there, I got another popular model at £12 (marked "hobby store uk 10x50"), which was the worst of the bunch. Red reflective "coatings", plus about 7x actual magnification, plus not more than 45 degrees apparent FOV and, the tour de force, just 19mm effective aperture... on a physically 10x50 binocular! You are lugging along a huge 800g 7x19 binocular that only shows blues and greens...
      Attaching a photo of the binoculars, as well as a comparison of the images VS a set of affordable 10x42 roof prisms (£32 new from Astroboot - so cheaper than at least one set compared), the brightness is the comparative and so are the colors (kept same exposure/iso/white balance and raw conversion). It is a shame people buying their first set of binoculars will end up with such garbage, but there's very few legitimate reviewers it seems... 


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.