• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

Sign in to follow this  

Falcon 9: SpaceX StarLink - Launch 1

Recommended Posts

wakjak    16,546

 

 

Thanks for screwing up the night sky Elon! Can't wait to see even more ruined astrophotography shots! Is there anything Elon Musk does that he doesn't screw up?

  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,319
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, wakjak said:
>

Thanks for screwing up the night sky Elon! Can't wait to see even more ruined astrophotography shots! Is there anything Elon Musk does that he doesn't screw up?

 

More FUD, someone get a shovel 🙄

 

Let's make it easier for you: these are small satellites, 95% of which turns into smoke on reentry. The vast majority are in orbits so low even if the de-orbit engine fails they come down in a year or less.  Even the high ones are short-lived because of natural clearing (atmospheric drag brings them down if the engine fails).

 

The Kessler Syndrome only applies to satellites in higher orbits.

 

Jonathan McDowell, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and premiere satellite tracker.

 

As he notes; once they're on-station, and their solar panels turn to the sun, their apparent brightness (from Earth) drastically dims. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by DocM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wakjak    16,546
Posted (edited)

So calling it FUD, while proving my point that it is a problem... Lol... Mmmkay. 

 

Now imagine what it's going to look like with 12000 of those suckers up there... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,319
27 minutes ago, wakjak said:

So calling it FUD, while proving my point that it is a problem... Lol... Mmmkay. 

 

It's not a Kessler Syndrome problem, and once on station at magnitude 5 or dimmer they'll be barely visible except for an occaisional solar panel flare - like the Iridium satellites. 

27 minutes ago, wakjak said:

 

Now imagine what it's going to look like with 12000 of those suckers up there... 

 

11,927, with the vast majority so low (7,518 at 325-345 km) they'll passively come down if they fail. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wakjak    16,546
5 minutes ago, DocM said:

It's not a Kessler Syndrome problem, 

I never said, nor mentioned it to be... Not sure why you keep deflecting with that... 

 

6 minutes ago, DocM said:

they'll be barely visible

Well that's been shown to be flat out incorrect. They are very visible. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,319
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, wakjak said:

I never said, nor mentioned it to be... Not sure why you keep deflecting with that... 

 

Well that's been shown to be flat out incorrect. They are very visible. 

 

Please get your tenses straight. 

 

You're talking present tense, just after launch into a temporary parking orbit they're already leaving.  The use of a parking orbit is very common in satellite launches.

 

I'm talking future tense, when these satellites are at their 550km operational altitude. 

 

Salt/pepper, sugar/vinegar. Get 'em straight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wakjak    16,546
1 hour ago, DocM said:

 

Please get your tenses straight. 

 

You're talking present tense, just after launch into a temporary parking orbit they're already leaving.  The use of a parking orbit is very common in satellite launches.

 

I'm talking future tense, when these satellites are at their 550km operational altitude. 

 

Salt/pepper, sugar/vinegar. Get 'em straight.

They're going an extra 100km out. Big woop. 100km is nothing when it comes to visibility in space.

Nothing I said is changed by which tense is used. They will still be visible at 550km as they are at 440km. 

Don't be obtuse.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,319
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, wakjak said:

They're going an extra 100km out. Big woop. 100km is nothing when it comes to visibility in space.

 

Please, look up the inverse square law. All else bring equal, and solar arrays being deployed which happens early, their brightness will only be about 64% of their initial  brightness.

 

Of course everything won't be equal, as described below, and they'll be dimmer.

 

Quote


Nothing I said is changed by which tense is used. They will still be visible at 550km as they are at 440km. 

 

No, they won't. They'll be further away as their Krypton thrusters raise their otbits, the ISL applies to light intensity, and their solar arrays will turn to an angle that only infrequently reflects in Earth's direction (some already have). Their solar arrays account for most of their reflected light, the main satellite bus being quite small.

 

Quote

Don't be obtuse.

 

Not being obtuse, but you sure are being dense.

 

The satellite observer threads at space sites already report it's getting hard to see the trailing StarLink satellites as they separate and rise in altitude. As the main group breaks up and more rise, turning their arrays, they too will dim. Eventually, there will be no bright group.

 

Quote

 

 

Edited by DocM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bguy_1986    351
14 hours ago, wakjak said:

 

 

Thanks for screwing up the night sky Elon! Can't wait to see even more ruined astrophotography shots! Is there anything Elon Musk does that he doesn't screw up?

you have a twitter problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    16,319
6 hours ago, bguy_1986 said:

you have a twitter problem.

 

More than just Twitter 🙄

  • Like 1

Share this post


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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.