Why do "Mega-constellations" Matter to the Dark Sky Community?

[greyl]

Experienced IDA observers in or near International Dark Sky Places have confirmed sightings of multiple Starlink satellites by the unaided eye in their final orbital positions. The satellites are brightest when fully illuminated by the Sun, which happens both during twilight as well as in a fully dark sky, depending on the observer’s latitude and the time of year. The human eye can detect objects in the night sky as faint as magnitude 7. Starlink satellites have been observed at magnitudes between 4and 6, making them easily detected in the night sky.

The sheer number of satellites, combined with the brightness of the objects and the frequency of sightings, is a serious threat to the dark sky community. Astronomers, astrophotographers, and stargazers have all shared concerns about mega-constellations polluting the night sky.

What is IDA doing about it?
IDA has met with leaders at SpaceX and called on the company to lead the way in this emerging field as responsible stewards of the night sky by pursuing innovative engineering solutions that minimize the impact to astronomical research, astrophotography, and night sky observations.

We have also worked collaboratively with the International Astronomical Union and American Astronomical Society to better understand the impact that mega-constellations will have on the night sky, as well as represent unaided eye observation in the ongoing dialogue about minimizing the impacts of mega-constellations.



https://www.darksky.org/why-do-mega-constellations-matter-to-the-dark-sky-community/

Link to tweet

[eppur_se_muova]

1. No one could have anticipated ... DUHHHH ! nt

[Bearware]

2. Perhaps a compromise would be better for all parties

There is no guarantee that climate change won't radically change the amount of cloud cover in the future, making observing very difficult or impossible.

Maybe the Dark Sky Community should go to Elon Musk and ask for support to help crowd-source creating and launching a medium to large optical space telescope as a dummy payload on a future SpaceX Starship test launch (instead of another Tesla vehicle).

Instead of building a hugely complicated instrument like those for professional astronomers, they might build a simpler instrument primarily designed to produce images. It still has to be a functioning spacecraft but it might be made easier to repair or upgrade in orbit. Future visits by a Starship will not be anywhere near as expensive as the Shuttle repair mission to the Space Telescope.

They may be able to create the mirror in space using liquid mercury or other suitable materials. This would allow the creation of potentially much larger mirrors than the diameter of the spacecraft without having a super expensive folding mirror.

With such an instrument, interested members of the Dark Sky Community could vote for what should be observed. Because it is in space it could be getting images day and night potentially all year long. Furthermore, it could quickly turn to look at new supernova, comets, close earth asteroids, planetary events, etc.

Even a partially successful project would probably get ground-based astronomers to stop building telescopes on earth and start looking up to building them in space.


Musk would probably love the science, would welcome the extra launches, might help support it with his own money and maybe convince some of his friends to do the same.

I have a related post below:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/122867407#post3

[NNadir]

3. Or, perhaps, Elon Musk could be less of a pig. n/t,

[Bearware]

4. In terms of greedy billionaires, Musk would seem to be in last place.

It's pretty clear he has most of his money tied up in Tesla and SpaceX. If they go broke, he will be close to broke. It is likely most of the profit from the satellites will go directly into SpaceX to finish developing Starship and Super-Heavy Booster. People on Earth are very likely to need that technology to be working relatively soon. If SpaceX is not able to get them fully functional I suspect it would be a long time before any other company could.

We are not moving with any dispatch to get new generation nuclear reactors developed which are far safer and truly renewable. Virtually all wind and solar power generation plants are all essentially backed up by less efficient natural gas peaker plants which add enough CO2 pollution and worse methane pollution (from leaks) to negate most of their "greenness".

We may well need Starship to set up lunar bases to mass-produce maneuverable solar shades to reduce the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth. Unlike spraying aerosols in the atmosphere, solar shades could be maneuvered or turned off at will if they are causing unexpected side effects. Without Starship, this approach would likely take decades longer, something we may not be able to afford.

If money is available, Starship could also become the critical stepping stone to cleaning up low earth orbit, especially with large and potentially uncontrolled satellites. I know his satellite array has the potential to cause something of a mini-Kessler Syndrome in lowest earth orbits but higher orbits are probably a worse problem because of very long orbital decay times. Loss of access to space could have devastating consequences for our attempts to control climate change.

In the long run, Musk will probably want next-generation nuclear reactors working because he is going to need some form of them to reduce the time it takes to get to Mars and also to produce methane fuel on the surface of Mars during dust storms (which can last for more than a year...).

On the subject of asteroids passing close to the earth, we apparently do not even have space-based telescopes looking for them. If one was discovered on a collision course anytime in the next 5-10 years, Earth would likely have very little to respond with if
SpaceX fails to complete a working Starship system.

Musk has also shown the ability to turn on a dime when convinced of a better approach, this is something that is close to impossible for most aerospace entities. Whatever your personal opinion of Musk, he has a clearly demonstrated ability to successfully make systems work that has been ruled undoable by many experts.

[NNadir]

5. Thanks for the science fiction scenario. I remain unconvinced that Musk is anything but a...

...a tiresome fool, a liar, a purveyor cheap and dishonest marketing, destroying what does not belong to him for circus amusement, and fond of expensive cheap tricks for which future generations will need to pay.

The sky is not his to destroy. It belongs to all humanity.