4 ms·

>“No one thought of this,” she said. “We didn’t think of it. The astronomy community didn’t think of it.” That is absolutely ridiculous. The Iridium satellites

>“No one thought of this,” she said. “We didn’t think of it. The astronomy community didn’t think of it.” That is absolutely ridiculous. The Iridium satellites were decommissioned recently and it was a big deal because, for the longest time, you had to check for "iridium flares" if you were using any type of sensitive equipment. Basically, the entire class of iridium satellites was highly reflective and they tended to create shooting star type phenomena, sometimes really really bright, bright enough to be seen during the daytime! Maybe she didn't think of it, but to say the astronomy comunity didn't think of it is just blatantly absurd on its face. On another note, I miss spotting iridium flares and I'm looking forward to a new class of satellites being added into my weekly observations.

readams 7y ago
They announced their plans years ago. The astronomy community could have raised concerns then. The fact that they didn't would indicate nobody connected the dots.
- dylan604 7y ago
  > The fact that they didn't would indicate nobody connected the dots. Or that nobody knew who/where to contact someone to raise their concerns. A lot of people will think that if I just had this thought, then it must be pretty obvious so that others will have the same thought as well. No need for further action. Others will just not feel the need to spend their time/effort trying to look up the complaints department. Others might not even feel like it is their place to say anything.
  - cobookman 7y ago
    It’s not that hard to get in contact. If you cared you could LinkedIn message a SpaceX employee. Tweet at Elon Musk. Connected with nyt or other media who’d love to run such a story. ...etc
    - cobookman 7y ago
      They also list contact info on their webpage. https://www.spacex.com/about https://www.spacex.com/about
      - ceejayoz 7y ago
        I'm really dubious of how well that approach is going to work.
      - Ididntdothis 7y ago
        I would expect this to work as well as contacting Google when you have a problem with their service.
    - adamsea 7y ago
      Yes very simple. Anyone can be a multi-millionaire working 4hrs a day or less.
  - throwaway2048 7y ago
    Or they were ignored
  - rrss 7y ago
    > nobody knew who/where to contact someone to raise their concerns SpaceX had to get approval from the FCC to launch these satellites. There was a comment period intended to provide an opportunity to voice these concerns. I looked into this the last time it was in the news (late May?), and could not find any petitions that raised concerns about reflecting light. There were several from other satellite companies requesting that the FCC deny the application based on concerns about increased risks of collision and/or radiointerference with their licensed bands.
    - mlyle 7y ago
      FCC isn't going to reject a radio license based on reflection of unregulated frequencies (light). But IAU publicly decried satellite constellations in January, months before May-- and this public statement followed literally years of IAU discussions and discussions with SpaceX, etc. Despite that, years later, SpaceX is only just getting around to taking small mitigation measures now, after two launches.
      - rrss 7y ago
        It wasn't a "radio license." It was an authorization to "construct, deploy, and operate a proposed non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellite system comprising 4,425 satellites for the provision of fixed-satellite service (FSS) around the world." I don't see why the FCC wouldn't consider impact to visual astronomy, when they did consider increased collision risk (also unrelated to any regulated frequencies). > IAU publicly decried satellite constellations in January, months before May Can you link to information about this public statement from January? When I google "IAU satellite constellations," I find only https://www.iau.org/news/announcements/detail/ann19035/ https://www.iau.org/news/announcements/detail/ann19035/ from June.
        mlyle 7y ago
        > It wasn't a "radio license." It's fundamentally a radio license: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/25.114 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/25.114 > when they did consider increased collision risk Yup, they are supposed to evaluate orbital debris and collision risk, too, 47 CFR 25.114(d)(14). That, and equitable service (for some services) to Alaska/Hawaii are the only non-radio concerns they are permitted by regulation to consider.
- wpietri 7y ago
  Your theory is that corporate responsibility ends when you make the first press release? That if specialists everywhere aren't paying attention to the business news, we've arrived at "who could have known"?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

readams 7y ago

They announced their plans years ago. The astronomy community could have raised concerns then. The fact that they didn't would indicate nobody connected the dots.

dylan604 7y ago
> The fact that they didn't would indicate nobody connected the dots. Or that nobody knew who/where to contact someone to raise their concerns. A lot of people will think that if I just had this thought, then it must be pretty obvious so that others will have the same thought as well. No need for further action. Others will just not feel the need to spend their time/effort trying to look up the complaints department. Others might not even feel like it is their place to say anything.
- cobookman 7y ago
  It’s not that hard to get in contact. If you cared you could LinkedIn message a SpaceX employee. Tweet at Elon Musk. Connected with nyt or other media who’d love to run such a story. ...etc
  - cobookman 7y ago
    They also list contact info on their webpage. https://www.spacex.com/about https://www.spacex.com/about
    - ceejayoz 7y ago
      I'm really dubious of how well that approach is going to work.
    - Ididntdothis 7y ago
      I would expect this to work as well as contacting Google when you have a problem with their service.
  - adamsea 7y ago
    Yes very simple. Anyone can be a multi-millionaire working 4hrs a day or less.
- throwaway2048 7y ago
  Or they were ignored
- rrss 7y ago
  > nobody knew who/where to contact someone to raise their concerns SpaceX had to get approval from the FCC to launch these satellites. There was a comment period intended to provide an opportunity to voice these concerns. I looked into this the last time it was in the news (late May?), and could not find any petitions that raised concerns about reflecting light. There were several from other satellite companies requesting that the FCC deny the application based on concerns about increased risks of collision and/or radiointerference with their licensed bands.
  - mlyle 7y ago
    FCC isn't going to reject a radio license based on reflection of unregulated frequencies (light). But IAU publicly decried satellite constellations in January, months before May-- and this public statement followed literally years of IAU discussions and discussions with SpaceX, etc. Despite that, years later, SpaceX is only just getting around to taking small mitigation measures now, after two launches.
    - rrss 7y ago
      It wasn't a "radio license." It was an authorization to "construct, deploy, and operate a proposed non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) satellite system comprising 4,425 satellites for the provision of fixed-satellite service (FSS) around the world." I don't see why the FCC wouldn't consider impact to visual astronomy, when they did consider increased collision risk (also unrelated to any regulated frequencies). > IAU publicly decried satellite constellations in January, months before May Can you link to information about this public statement from January? When I google "IAU satellite constellations," I find only https://www.iau.org/news/announcements/detail/ann19035/ https://www.iau.org/news/announcements/detail/ann19035/ from June.
      - mlyle 7y ago
        > It wasn't a "radio license." It's fundamentally a radio license: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/25.114 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/25.114 > when they did consider increased collision risk Yup, they are supposed to evaluate orbital debris and collision risk, too, 47 CFR 25.114(d)(14). That, and equitable service (for some services) to Alaska/Hawaii are the only non-radio concerns they are permitted by regulation to consider.
wpietri 7y ago
Your theory is that corporate responsibility ends when you make the first press release? That if specialists everywhere aren't paying attention to the business news, we've arrived at "who could have known"?
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]