Prof. Sam LawlerMay 30, 2025

Oh hey cool, an op-ed I wrote is now published!

TLDR: we need *fewer* satellites, each with *longer* operational lifetimes. Engineers: that's your challenge.

https://www.livescience.com/space/astronomy/what-goes-up-must-come-down-how-megaconstellations-like-spacexs-starlink-network-pose-a-grave-safety-threat-to-us-on-earth-opinion

What goes up must come down: How megaconstellations like SpaceX's Starlink network pose a grave safety threat to us on Earth

Thousands of satellites with incredibly short lifetimes are being sent up into low Earth orbit. When they fall back down they're fireballs of pollution — and what doesn't burn up hits the ground.

Live Science
Show threadBill Zaumen
l@[email protected] First, I basically agree with your main point. But, it is not a "challenge" for engineers - look how long the Hubble space telescope has been in orbit. The problem is billionaires who only look out for themselves. Also the picture that went with your article is a bit misleading: a short while later, those satellites would be invisible optically due to no longer being in direct sunlight, but it is difficult to create an image applicable at radio frequencies.
May 31, 2025 at 12:35amWeb
Show threadBill ZaumenMay 31, 2025
To add a bit more: I once spent a week or two NRAO in West Virginia. To get around, you had to use vehicles with diesel engines, which don't have spark plugs. Those "sparks" create a lot of noise that interferes with the sensative electronics used in radio telescopes. It's no surprise that clusters of satellites continually transmitting in low earth orbit would be a problem.
Show threadMy camera shoots fascistsMay 31, 2025

@bzdev

Yeah, this seems more like a regulatory challenge than an engineering one, but IAmNotAnAstronomer so 🤷‍♂️