15 votes

SpaceX tests black satellite to reduce ‘megaconstellation’ threat to astronomy

9 comments

  1. [3]
    0lpbm
    Link
    This could be the best application of Vantablack there is. Space vacuum won't mess with the its nano structure, unlike any other real world case.

    This could be the best application of Vantablack there is. Space vacuum won't mess with the its nano structure, unlike any other real world case.

    6 votes
    1. [2]
      moocow1452
      Link Parent
      There is a blacker black that isn't nearly as restrictive. http://news.mit.edu/2019/blackest-black-material-cnt-0913

      There is a blacker black that isn't nearly as restrictive.

      http://news.mit.edu/2019/blackest-black-material-cnt-0913

      8 votes
      1. 0lpbm
        Link Parent
        Technology wise they seem very similar... a forest of nanotubes of some sort of support. That sounds very fragile in both cases.

        Technology wise they seem very similar... a forest of nanotubes of some sort of support. That sounds very fragile in both cases.

  2. [4]
    balooga
    Link
    Astronomy concerns aside, I haven't heard any discussion of the issues a minefield of invisible satellites would present for spacecraft navigation. I don't know anything about how object avoidance...

    Astronomy concerns aside, I haven't heard any discussion of the issues a minefield of invisible satellites would present for spacecraft navigation.

    I don't know anything about how object avoidance is handled today. Is anyone familiar with how the space shuttle maneuvers around hazards, and if reducing their visibility will have any effect on that? I'm guessing there's some combination of global satellite tracking database and onboard radar, but I really have no clue.

    4 votes
    1. skybrian
      Link Parent
      At 17,000 miles per hour, onboard radar would be pretty useless, so I'm pretty sure it's just global satellite tracking. Apparently there is a thing called a Whipple Shield that breaks smaller...

      At 17,000 miles per hour, onboard radar would be pretty useless, so I'm pretty sure it's just global satellite tracking. Apparently there is a thing called a Whipple Shield that breaks smaller debris up a bit, but for small stuff, it's just a matter of chance whether it hits anything. (Space is big.) Shuttles did get hit a few times.

      (Also, the last space shuttle flight was in 2011.)

      5 votes
    2. blitz
      Link Parent
      Scott Manley as usual has a video about how various agencies coordinate (or fail to coordinate) collision avoidance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJcnQq8XDoY I really doubt that satellite...

      Scott Manley as usual has a video about how various agencies coordinate (or fail to coordinate) collision avoidance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJcnQq8XDoY

      I really doubt that satellite trackers use visible light to keep track of satellites. Each one is beaming down a bunch of RF data that can probably be used to track the satellites instead. There's also a bunch of space debris in low earth orbit that has to be tracked in order to execute avoidance maneuvers, which I guess is tracked optically,

      2 votes
    3. Neverland
      Link Parent
      Here is a really interesting podcast episode about this subject. This is about the guy who first started collating and publicly presenting this data. He started with letters to NASA and a dial-up...

      Here is a really interesting podcast episode about this subject. This is about the guy who first started collating and publicly presenting this data. He started with letters to NASA and a dial-up BBS.

      I talked with T.S. Kelso about the history of CelesTrak.com and satellite tracking on the internet as a whole, as well as a few topics relevant to the modern day: satellite tracking and orbit reporting among operators, conjunction and collision monitoring, and space debris mitigation and management

      https://mainenginecutoff.com/podcast/142

  3. skybrian
    Link
    From the article: [...] [...] [...]

    From the article:

    Astronomers discussed the potential impacts of the satellites on various telescopes, and what could be done about them, on 8 January at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society in Honolulu, Hawaii. “2020 is the window to figure out what makes a difference in reducing the impact,” says Jeffrey Hall, director of Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, and chair of the society’s committee on light pollution.

    [...]

    Several factors contribute to their puzzling brightness, astronomers reported at the meeting. SpaceX says the position of the solar panels might have something to do with it: at lower elevations, before the orbit boost, the satellites’ panels are positioned like an open book to reduce drag. That temporary orientation could make them reflect more sunlight. The speed at which a satellite moves across a telescope’s field of view is also important — the slower it moves, the more brightness accumulates per pixel of imagery.

    [...]

    Tyson’s team is working on possible software fixes for the anticipated satellite trails, such as ways to electronically erase trails and other glitches they induce in astronomical images. But “we’re still left with all the complexity of having all these things removed and all these systematic errors”, Tyson says.

    [...]

    That leaves darkening as a leading option. With DarkSat, SpaceX engineers painted surfaces on the satellite that scatter light or reflect light diffusely, says Cooper. That could make them faint enough to be invisible to anyone looking up at a typical night sky — but almost certainly still visible to most astronomical research telescopes.

    2 votes
  4. patience_limited
    Link
    Not sure what can be done about reflections from the solar panels. The article notes the panel reflections are maximally bright during launch; you'd think the permanent orientation could still...

    Not sure what can be done about reflections from the solar panels. The article notes the panel reflections are maximally bright during launch; you'd think the permanent orientation could still capture adequate radiation without reflecting it back towards Earth.

    1 vote