Amazon to put 3000 satellites into orbit

[wimvb]

According to an article I just received in my news feed the US government agency FCC has approved Amazon's request to put 3000 satellites into a (lower) earth orbit constellation to provide its customers with internet access. I find this disturbing.

According to the article in space.com,

"The company has now satisfied conditions including a plan to address issues of collision risk, post-mission disposal reliability, completion of satellite design, and orbital separation."

Nothing about how Amazon will prevent their fleet from interfering with astronomical observations.

https://www.space.com/fcc-approves-amazon-constellation-kuiper

[ollypenrice]

This will not end well.

Olly

[Peter Drew]

I've not had any problem so far accessing Amazon via the internet so what was their problem?     😧

[ONIKKINEN]

Clipping will remove the trails from images so not really worried about that.

From a kessler syndrome point of view, maybe a bit worrying but its only a matter of time that becomes a reality anyway.

[EarthLife]

31 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

This will not end well.

Indeed, but we're pretty sure that this also applies to most everything the human race is doing, our shear level of denial is ever so comforting - so long as we continue to pretend it's not real.

Edited February 23 by EarthLife

[wimvb]

Just now, ONIKKINEN said:

Clipping will remove the trails from images so not really worried about that.

The concern isn't so much for the amateur astrophotography community as it is for the professional community, where observing time is expensive, and where it isn't always possible to redo observations.

Until recently, sending a satellite into orbit was a relatively rare event, with deployment being one at a time. Now, satellites are being deployed by the hundreds per rocket launch.

This may ring a bell? (Sorry for the pun)

[EarthLife]

 

https://dlmultimedia.esa.int/download/public/videos/2019/02/006/1902_006_AR_EN.mp4https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Videos/2019/02/Distribution_of_space_debris_in_orbit_around_Earth

 

[ONIKKINEN]

1 hour ago, wimvb said:

The concern isn't so much for the amateur astrophotography community as it is for the professional community, where observing time is expensive, and where it isn't always possible to redo observations.

Until recently, sending a satellite into orbit was a relatively rare event, with deployment being one at a time. Now, satellites are being deployed by the hundreds per rocket launch.

This may ring a bell? (Sorry for the pun)

How big of an issue is a satellite strike for professional astronomy really? Is it only a critical issue when the satellite happens to fly directly over some tiny target that just so happens to need that exact moment of clarity, like i dont know, exoplanet transits or something like this? Genuinely dont know if its such a big deal.

But the speed of development is the worrying part here for sure. 10 years ago mass launching and more importantly: mass launching and re usability at a low cost was not on anyone's mind and now its just another day in the industry. Where are we 10 years from now? Kessler syndrome will happen, the question is when and i think its not too many decades off if more private entities want to get a piece of the orbiting internet money generator pie. Also what worries me is that why is this necessary and is it really such a good long term investment? Fiber optic internet is faster than satellite internet simply because the distances are shorter across the ground than first doing a hop to 600km upwards (the wrong way) and then several similar hops of the signal between satellites, at least the speed thing is valid for more or less local connections (like within europe lets say). Most urban areas in the developed world already have good fiber and that doesn't fall out of the sky every 7 years. Areas around the world that are still developing will want to get fiber infrastructure rather than a private internet owned by the richest person in the world that can be switched off or reduced in capacity at will...

Edited February 23 by ONIKKINEN

[wimvb]

1 minute ago, ONIKKINEN said:

fly directly over some tiny target that just so happens to need that exact moment of clarity, like i dont know, exoplanet transits or something like this? Genuinely dont know if its such a big deal.

I would think that if you're doing photometry on groups of faint stars, it may very well be much of a deal. Remember, unlike amateurs, professional astronomers need to apply for time on a telescope, long in advance. They only have limited time for their observations, and often can't redo an observation if the results are garbage. A satellite streak not only affects what is directly underneath, but also what is closeby, limiting the usable area of an image. Even non-reflecting satellites can affect photometry measurements, because they can pass in front of stars to be measured, affecting magnitude measurements and resulting in difficult to detect errors in colour-magnitude diagrams.

[ollypenrice]

11 hours ago, wimvb said:

The concern isn't so much for the amateur astrophotography community as it is for the professional community, where observing time is expensive, and where it isn't always possible to redo observations.

Until recently, sending a satellite into orbit was a relatively rare event, with deployment being one at a time. Now, satellites are being deployed by the hundreds per rocket launch.

This may ring a bell? (Sorry for the pun)

That's a very profound comparison. Nobody contemplating urban planning would, had this outcome been forseeen, have sanctioned it as an objective. But it never was an objective - and there's the rub.

Olly

[Mr H in Yorkshire]

How soon will it be before SatelliteGazersLounge goes live to the world? Accessible at every former dark site courtesy of the thousands of satellites that have displaced the stars. And will the pursuit be readily taken up by the AP community? I dare say some savvy entrepreneur is commissioning the high speed mounts and software even now. 

[DaveS]

The Musk-rat has a constellation, Bozo wants one too.

[EarthLife]

Koyaanisqatsi

[Alien 13]

I understand the need for these things, I live in a UK city not far from the center and cant get full fibre broadband for another 7 years so could be tempted 😋

Alan

[Shimrod]

On 24/02/2023 at 08:36, DaveS said:

The Musk-rat has a constellation, Bozo wants one too.

I'm not sure derogatory names adds anything to the debate. In this hyper-connected world we now inhabit, most want to have internet access just about everywhere they go - and the satellites do provide an alternative way of connecting remote communties across large parts of the earth where land-based infrastructure costs would otherwise be a prohibitive factor.

To my mind it would have been better if there had been some kind of single satellite network with either shared services or carrying equipment from multiple providers - this would have avoiding many satellites all providing the same function. The flip side of that is you get concerns about security  (like the Huawei issue recently in the news) and monopolistic practices - which is why sadly this would never happen.

[Mr Magoo]

Another 3000 satellites is bad news. With more countries inevitably becoming capable of their own space programmes, this trend is likely to get worse. I despair that we have polluted this planet and now seem intent on doing the same to the immediate space around us.

[LukeSkywatcher]

When will Branson be sending his contribution up?

[DaveS]

I can see a Kessler Cascade coming, then nobody will be able to get to orbit.

[niallk]

Ffs.... 🙄

There's gonna be a cascading smash up.

Edit:

Wot @DaveS just said 😂

Edited February 26 by niallk

[wimvb]

4 hours ago, Shimrod said:

To my mind it would have been better if there had been some kind of single satellite network

Good point, which I was about to make also. Where terrestrial infrastructure is concerned, nobody questions this. In fact, no company would nowadays even contemplate building their own railway network, or their own electricity network. But in space, anything goes, it seems.

2 hours ago, Mr Magoo said:

With more countries inevitably becoming capable of their own space programmes, this trend is likely to get worse.

I can imagine the reactions if or when that superpower in the far east starts deploying its own satellite network. Or maybe they're opting for a balloon based network?

[tomato]

I’ve just watched  presentation on YouTube by Grant about the FLO observatory in Spain. Apparently they make good use of Starlink for  internet connectivity, so there are some benefits to the astro community.

[wimvb]

Herein lies the problem. Some number of communication satellites is a good thing. But too many isn't. Because too many, and FLO (or anyone else) can't do any sensible astrophotography anymore, and therefore won't need those satellites. But, how many is too many? (Btw, amateur astrophotography is only a very minor aspect of the issues at hand.) Equally important, should any one national regulatory organisation be allowed to decide on global activities that clearly also have global negative impact?

Btw, I read in my newsfeed yesterday that chinese researchers are investigating ways to incapacitate starlink satellites, since they are also used (or, can also be used) by the US military.

It seems to me that the we are at the beginning of a space race.

[Mr Magoo]

I noted recently that the ESA Sentinel Satellite 2B underwent a maintenance operation for a collision avoidance manoeuvre. There must be a lot of that going on we don't hear about. As a purely visual observer I've seen a number of events that can only be space debris burning up in our atmosphere, quite spectacular.

https://sentinels.copernicus.eu/web/sentinel/home

Edited March 5 by Mr Magoo

[Mr Magoo]

Watching Earthlife's ESA video of smaller and smaller particles orbiting in space, makes me think of the way we measure smaller and smaller particles of plastic in the oceans. Pollution all the same.

Edited March 5 by Mr Magoo

[DaveS]

On 26/02/2023 at 16:12, Shimrod said:

I'm not sure derogatory names adds anything to the debate. 

I rather think that the "derogatory names" I've used are very mild compared to the expletives used by professional astronomers who have just had their observations stuffed up by another lump of Musk's junk.

Edited March 5 by DaveS
Correcting autostuffup.