3 ms·
The edge of observational science is the sensor and the satellite is built to support that. Radically different sensors have radically different engineering re
by verytrivial 7y ago
The edge of observational science is the sensor and the satellite is built to support that. Radically different sensors have radically different engineering requirements. And to an extent, there is already a bunch of re-use between missions for the bus, power, control etc. But casually comparing a 10x10cm cube sat sensor to something literally over 3,000 the area feeding to a cryogenically cooled sensor to somehow argue in favour of SpaceX's current deployments is ... hard to reason with.
- toomuchtodo 7y agoI am casually stating that it's time for observation science and engineering to evolve. StarLink isn't the only obstacle to earth based observation; siting requirements can constrain where observatories can be built, staff and equipment having to be colocated (sometimes in remote geographic locations), relations with local stakeholders can be fraught with peril [1], all avoided by lifting to space. Will it be challenging to design observatories for space that were previously designed to be built on Earth? Certainly! Should we shy away from the challenge as an advancing civilization? Absolutely not. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Meter_Telescope#Approval_process_and_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Meter_Telescope#Approva...