Horror Story - Satellite Scandal

[Ouroboros]

2 hours ago, SamAndrew said:

You joke, I don't think it will be long before we see space rent-a-scopes appearing, the cost to put a satellite into space and the cost of a top armature setup have probably converged already. Would be an interesting Kickstarter project.

It was a sort of joke … but, yes, I can imagine that the marginal cost of satellites will eventually fall to the point where private satellite observatories become financially viable. But I think there’s an irony in the fact that those creating the problem are also offering the solution, at a price of course. It’s like they’re privatising our skies. 

[petevasey]

10 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

It was a sort of joke … but, yes, I can imagine that the marginal cost of satellites will eventually fall to the point where private satellite observatories become financially viable. But I think there’s an irony in the fact that those creating the problem are also offering the solution, at a price of course. It’s like they’re privatising our skies. 

They will of course have to be very high, otherwise if the plethora of communication satellites are above the observatories, the situation won't be much better.  I suggest three above the equator equaly spaced in geostationary orbits, so there will always be at least one accessible anywhere at any time of the year.    Anybody won a mega lottery?  😁

Cheers,

Peter

[Ouroboros]

25 minutes ago, petevasey said:

They will of course have to be very high, otherwise if the plethora of communication satellites are above the observatories, the situation won't be much better.  I suggest three above the equator equaly spaced in geostationary orbits, so there will always be at least one accessible anywhere at any time of the year.    Anybody won a mega lottery?  😁

Cheers,

Peter

I think you only have to do the numbers to realise this will only ever be available to a minority of amateur astronomers.

Anyway, while we’re having fun throwing around this idea why not imagine huge telescope farms on the far side of the moon.  

[SamAndrew]

Have done a little research, hard to find specific numbers, but if a cube sat is ~ $50k to build and another $50K to launch currently, I think you would already find buyers if something came to market. Assuming Starship is a success, and the cost to low earth orbit comes down 50~100 fold, along with the other admin costs, and then the economies of scale if someone starts mass producing the satellites, I could envision a small orbital observatory costing $10K.

[Ouroboros]

Could be cloud funded? 😉

[ONIKKINEN]

1 hour ago, SamAndrew said:

Have done a little research, hard to find specific numbers, but if a cube sat is ~ $50k to build and another $50K to launch currently, I think you would already find buyers if something came to market. Assuming Starship is a success, and the cost to low earth orbit comes down 50~100 fold, along with the other admin costs, and then the economies of scale if someone starts mass producing the satellites, I could envision a small orbital observatory costing $10K.

That estimate is way too low. Enthusiast setups are often over 10K here on earth! 100k>couple million maybe but 10K i really dont see happening unless its some small system like a Samyang 135 taped to a cubesat that will deorbit in a week.

[SamAndrew]

It's ambitious, but Starship will be a game changer if it works; once you bring the cost to orbit down 10~50 fold, the volume of satellites being launched will scale up massively, which will bring the cost of everything else down by orders of magnitude.

[Ouroboros]

33 minutes ago, SamAndrew said:

It's ambitious, but Starship will be a game changer if it works; once you bring the cost to orbit down 10~50 fold, the volume of satellites being launched will scale up massively, which will bring the cost of everything else down by orders of magnitude.

Except the cost of everyone being able to see the stars except through an ever growing mist of satellites.  😪

[licho52]

On 22/05/2023 at 16:14, SamAndrew said:

Have done a little research, hard to find specific numbers, but if a cube sat is ~ $50k to build and another $50K to launch currently, I think you would already find buyers if something came to market. Assuming Starship is a success, and the cost to low earth orbit comes down 50~100 fold, along with the other admin costs, and then the economies of scale if someone starts mass producing the satellites, I could envision a small orbital observatory costing $10K.

People will pay that in a heartbeat if it gets them that AB IOTD.  Being completely serious here.  They already use 24" Planewaves, buy farms in Namibia etc etc.  just to get that badge. 

[Starflyer]

The people saying it's not a problem, we have the tools to trigger the sat trails aren't in possession of the full facts or have a very short sighted view IMO.

It's getting to a point where the professionals could miss a dangerous asteroid or comet that's inbound.

And, at some point we'll need to get off this rock; population, resources etc, and if there's a collision of these satellites that causes a chain reaction we'll be stuck down here.

[pipnina]

On 17/05/2023 at 17:57, Paul M said:

I'm in the group that just wonders "why"?

There is, surely, over supply of global Internet already?

What we see here is bandwagon jumping and the fight for market share.

We are in an area of the country where "6G broadband" is being rolled out. It's government money behind it, for some reason. There is already oversupply of broadband here. We currently have Fiber to Cabinet. We could have fiber to the house if we wanted.

But suddenly there were hundreds of new telegraph poles being erected. They run down our street, all over the place. Hundreds of them. So on investigation found that a new system of broadband is being installed. The poles carry fiber cables to transmission masts that then beam internet to subscribers via a small active antenna on their roof or chimney.

We have a similar system at our Luxury Cumbrian Villa, but it's rural, no other infrastructure.

The masts for this new 6G are hideous. Luckily we don't have one down our street, just the fiber cable zigzagging around the existing phone lines and poles. The system is designed to be fully independent of Openreach infrastructure. The reviews of the product from early adopters are pants.

The masts are a dystopian vision. They were erected under a "Statutory Notice". No planning and no public consultation.

Not sure what's the driver, it's costing millions of pounds. But you might actually need your foil hats this time! 

Here is our neatest one. Give me satellite trails any day! 

 

I can't share the horror at the mast's appearance, albeit I think they could put some effort in to make it look nicer, such as disguising them as trees (or even planting grown trees with the antennas near the top)

Super fast phone internet is a bit silly to me, as what customers really want are *usable* speeds and broad coverage, which is typically offered by 4g and 5g in cities but can barely be found at all in more rural areas. Why do we need more than 5g? 5g already supposedly covers a very wide range of uses from insane speeds (millimeter wavelengths that are fast and high capacity but require totally uninterrupted line of sight, all the way to long microwaves that are able to penetrate deep into buildings)

I would argue that while many of us are quite happy with our internet, I myself enjoy a cozy 300+mbps download and 25mbps upload, there are many many people who have connections too slow to be considered bearable if you have any use beyond browsing internet forums!

I have a friend near Durham, who moved into a new house that was advertised as having fiber internet, only to discover that it is actually a very very BT-neglected ADSL line that can't manage sustained download speeds of more than 1MBps, and it is often slower. Add to that that their freeview TV mast was burned down for 2 years before it was repaired and they were quite unhappy. BT wanted £15'000 to run the fiber cable the next 30 meters down the street to them.

Many in even more rural areas lack even ADSL internet, especially in larger countries like the US or australia, or poor/developing countries, or worse countries where internet is restricted like Cuba.

For all these people, LEO satellite internet is a godsend even if it's not as cheap as cable in cities. I fully understand and see its importance and yet I despise that it must exist in such a way, and I also am very fearful for China, India, and possibly other countries or even private industries all wanting their own totally unique network!

One good internationally supplied and protected LEO sat internet is enough... More networks is just pointless wastes of money, sky ruining, and likely the work of the worst aspects of human society: Regimes and Publicly listed corporations.

[ollypenrice]

On 20/06/2023 at 23:33, licho52 said:

People will pay that in a heartbeat if it gets them that AB IOTD.  Being completely serious here.  They already use 24" Planewaves, buy farms in Namibia etc etc.  just to get that badge. 

I've had ten IOTDs with small refractors. I've also used a 14 inch reflector extensively in the past and, quite honestly, modern cameras are making big instruments less and less necessary. Nor do I think that getting an IOTD has anything at all to say about a person's motivation. I don't think anybody stopped posting on SGL when Picture of the Week was discontinued.

 

On 22/05/2023 at 17:38, ONIKKINEN said:

That estimate is way too low. Enthusiast setups are often over 10K here on earth! 100k>couple million maybe but 10K i really dont see happening unless its some small system like a Samyang 135 taped to a cubesat that will deorbit in a week.

  My best image on AB was with a Samyang 135 and it didn't get IOTD. I still feel it's my best image (with Paul Kummer and Peter Woods) but I think Id feel happier to see it down here on a mount than tossed into space on a Muskmobile.

lly 

[SamAndrew]

On 22/06/2023 at 18:24, Starflyer said:

The people saying it's not a problem, we have the tools to trigger the sat trails aren't in possession of the full facts or have a very short sighted view IMO.

It's getting to a point where the professionals could miss a dangerous asteroid or comet that's inbound.

And, at some point we'll need to get off this rock; population, resources etc, and if there's a collision of these satellites that causes a chain reaction we'll be stuck down here.

Asteroid detection is better than ever, we've only been looking for dangerous objects for a very short period of time. We have never been at a point where there is a 100% chance of detecting all dangerous objects. They just need to adjust the detection techniques to account for the impact of satellite trails.

Even with a catastrophic Kessler scenario we would still be able to get beyond low Earth orbit.

[powerlord]

On 22/05/2023 at 09:53, SamAndrew said:

You joke, I don't think it will be long before we see space rent-a-scopes appearing, the cost to put a satellite into space and the cost of a top armature setup have probably converged already. Would be an interesting Kickstarter project.

 

On 22/05/2023 at 09:53, SamAndrew said:

You joke, I don't think it will be long before we see space rent-a-scopes appearing, the cost to put a satellite into space and the cost of a top armature setup have probably converged already. Would be an interesting Kickstarter project.

You know, some of the best drones now have telephoto lenses - the DJI mavic 3 pro for example has a 166mm f3.4 lens on a 1/2" cmos sensor.

and its stability control, like all djis is incredible. It'd be interesting to see some long exposure shots taken with it of the sky at altitude.. and stack em up. dispense with maybe the most dirty lower 5k or so...

I've just got a new one myself after selling my old ones - a mini 3 pro. I'm going up to scotland next week and hope to try some night shots with it.

The tech is there to do stability now based on IMU and object recognition. I made a similar comment on here a year or so ago - there's no technical reason why someone couldn't do one of those 'balloons to 50-80k with a gopro' projects - but instead have an IMU stabilised + object detection stablised camera shooting at maybe 200mm or so. It'd be interesting to see how much more detail could be captured of some of the larger galaxies for example with such a setup - I'd have thought maybe 10 sec subs possible, and several hours at alti could be shot before return to earth...

I feel a kickstarter coming on.. give me your money 😄

[petevasey]

That's heck of a drone.  At a heck of a price!  Can the camera gimbal rotate upwards, and if so, how high?

Cheers,

Peter.

[wimvb]

2 hours ago, petevasey said:

Can the camera gimbal rotate upwards, and if so, how high?

Do you want ”rotor trails ” in stead of satellite trails? 😉

[powerlord]

3 hours ago, petevasey said:

That's heck of a drone.  At a heck of a price!  Can the camera gimbal rotate upwards, and if so, how high?

Cheers,

Peter.

yeh 35 degrees up, much same as my wee mini.

[GTom]

On 16/05/2023 at 12:53, scotty38 said:

Harsh reality but taking pretty pictures versus the proposed benefits is never going to cut any ice with non astronomers never mind governments etc. I mean we can't even agree on things that folk do recognise as affecting the planet/people/universe let alone on things they cannot......

Just looking on the non-astro aspect: I highly doubt that it's more economic to litter the LEO with thousands of satellites, replacing hundred+ each year, than pulling a cheap optical cabel along all ROADS on the planet. Rural US is crying for fast internet (no it doesn't, SOME living there do): their solution is not Musk, all farms have a road...

If someone choose to live on a fully disconnected island then enjoy being disconnected from the noise of the world, no need for screen addiction if you have mother nature around you 7/24, 3D, 8k+resolution or whatever your v1.0 eyes allow. 

People don't have to and must not litter 100% of the planet, if someone can't live without internet (methinks we've done quite well for a couple thousands of years), move closer to broadband. I like chilled beer in the summer heat, yet I definitely do not want a pub in every 500meters in the Sahara. I like good infrastructure, yet I definitely do not want a 6+6 lane highway from my drive straight to Edinburgh. "Business", "profit", some pieces of colored papers do not worth it, period.

Edited July 7, 2023 by GTom

[GTom]

On 22/06/2023 at 19:06, pipnina said:

BT wanted £15'000 to run the fiber cable the next 30 meters down the street to them.

Now THAT IS a problem and curing it it has nothing to do with Musk's megalomaniac plans. Buerocrats, so called IT "experts" (not experts anymore, all work outsourced to India) asking for thousands for pressing 2 buttons on their keyboards just because they got monopoly.

Edited July 7, 2023 by GTom

[Hawksmoor]

When I give thought to the more stupid behaviours of our species I recall a copy of the ‘Mad’ magazine I read in my youth. Alfred E Newman was considering the improvement of his High Fi system  by instalments. The system starts small with a few components and issuing from the speakers was the bubble “eat more pork sausages ma”! After adding more components over time and at considerable cost, the smiling Mr N looks on whilst issuing from the bank of speakers was the bubble “EAT MORE PORK SAUSAGES MA”!  
Good job humans also come packaged with kindness and love but a bit more common sense and environmental responsibility wouldn’t go amiss!

George next the sea.

[wulfrun]

The folks down-under are getting bothered by this too, came across this on ABC:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-09/elon-musk-starlink-interfering-in-scientific-work/102575480

[SamAndrew]

On 07/07/2023 at 13:08, GTom said:

Just looking on the non-astro aspect: I highly doubt that it's more economic to litter the LEO with thousands of satellites, replacing hundred+ each year, than pulling a cheap optical cabel along all ROADS on the planet. Rural US is crying for fast internet (no it doesn't, SOME living there do): their solution is not Musk, all farms have a road...

Quick Google suggests 65,000,000 km of road x ~$15,000 a km is about $1 Trillion

Cost of Starlink network is around $10 billion

[Scott Badger]

I'm surprised there's been no mention of the social impact that losing our night sky will have/is having, not just from Starlink, but already lost to ground based light pollution increasing at an exponential rate. Consider how much of our narratives, mythologies, and religions are invested in the night sky -- the sense of wonder, awe, mystery, scale, and even fright that it brings to our lives. Just one or two generations from now, when stars and planets are simply a fact, not an experience, when all we can see (if anything) is a reflection of ourselves in the technology we've hidden it behind, our worldview can't but be significantly changed, and I doubt for the better.......

Scott