Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. These companies all want sun-synchronous terminator orbits, so that they can be sunlit all the time*.

These companies all want sun-synchronous terminator orbits, so that they can be sunlit all the time*.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
42 Indlæg 21 Posters 134 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
    sundogplanets@mastodon.social
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #1

    These companies all want sun-synchronous terminator orbits, so that they can be sunlit all the time*. Sun-synchronous orbits have a nodal precession rate that matches Earth's orbit period around the sun. Meaning, they keep the same configuration relative to local daytime. If the satellite passes over the equator where it is 6pm directly under the satellite, it will always do that.

    *important problem with this assumption coming later in the thread

    sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

      These companies all want sun-synchronous terminator orbits, so that they can be sunlit all the time*. Sun-synchronous orbits have a nodal precession rate that matches Earth's orbit period around the sun. Meaning, they keep the same configuration relative to local daytime. If the satellite passes over the equator where it is 6pm directly under the satellite, it will always do that.

      *important problem with this assumption coming later in the thread

      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
      sundogplanets@mastodon.social
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #2

      We model 3 different configurations that 5 different companies have asked for variations on. An "X-ring", where both possible nodes are used, so you get one orbit tilted at ~98 degrees (depending on inclination) and the other tiled at ~82 degrees. They make an X over the equator. There's also "X-ring plus orbital shell" which is whatever the fuck SpaceX asked for with their million satellite filing. And a single ring, which is self-explanatory.

      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS hnapel@mastodon.socialH 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • kigelia@mastodon.onlineK This user is from outside of this forum
        kigelia@mastodon.onlineK This user is from outside of this forum
        kigelia@mastodon.online
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #3

        @sundogplanets @hannorein

        Just thinking about this - does filling the sky with these satellites make locating/tracking large asteroids on possible collision course with earth more difficult?

        sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

          We model 3 different configurations that 5 different companies have asked for variations on. An "X-ring", where both possible nodes are used, so you get one orbit tilted at ~98 degrees (depending on inclination) and the other tiled at ~82 degrees. They make an X over the equator. There's also "X-ring plus orbital shell" which is whatever the fuck SpaceX asked for with their million satellite filing. And a single ring, which is self-explanatory.

          sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
          sundogplanets@mastodon.social
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #4

          Next we have to make wild assumptions about the size of the satellites, because all of these companies have no idea what the fuck they are doing (and orbital data centers might not even be physically possible), so they haven't actually provided any solid info on how big they are. We are guessing from sketches posted on twitter, basically. SpaceX is ~800m^2 of reflective solar panel, so we use that for every company.

          sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

            Next we have to make wild assumptions about the size of the satellites, because all of these companies have no idea what the fuck they are doing (and orbital data centers might not even be physically possible), so they haven't actually provided any solid info on how big they are. We are guessing from sketches posted on twitter, basically. SpaceX is ~800m^2 of reflective solar panel, so we use that for every company.

            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
            sundogplanets@mastodon.social
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #5

            A completely fucking ridiculous drawing in an FCC filing from Cowboy space (I did a thread about that last week, https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/117009754043091268) indicates they might have a reflecting area of 4800 m^2. WAY BIGGER than the ISS, the biggest thing ever placed in orbit, in pieces, not as one monolith. These companies are just making shit up. For comparison's sake, we just use 800m^2 for every simulation.

            michael@weatherby2378.socialM sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS poslovitch@wikis.worldP stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS 4 Replies Last reply
            1
            0
            • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

              We model 3 different configurations that 5 different companies have asked for variations on. An "X-ring", where both possible nodes are used, so you get one orbit tilted at ~98 degrees (depending on inclination) and the other tiled at ~82 degrees. They make an X over the equator. There's also "X-ring plus orbital shell" which is whatever the fuck SpaceX asked for with their million satellite filing. And a single ring, which is self-explanatory.

              hnapel@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
              hnapel@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
              hnapel@mastodon.social
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #6

              @sundogplanets

              One ring to rule them all.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                A completely fucking ridiculous drawing in an FCC filing from Cowboy space (I did a thread about that last week, https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/117009754043091268) indicates they might have a reflecting area of 4800 m^2. WAY BIGGER than the ISS, the biggest thing ever placed in orbit, in pieces, not as one monolith. These companies are just making shit up. For comparison's sake, we just use 800m^2 for every simulation.

                michael@weatherby2378.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                michael@weatherby2378.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                michael@weatherby2378.social
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #7

                @sundogplanets

                Here is the link to the first post of the thread, if that helps:

                https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/117009754043091268

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                  A completely fucking ridiculous drawing in an FCC filing from Cowboy space (I did a thread about that last week, https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/117009754043091268) indicates they might have a reflecting area of 4800 m^2. WAY BIGGER than the ISS, the biggest thing ever placed in orbit, in pieces, not as one monolith. These companies are just making shit up. For comparison's sake, we just use 800m^2 for every simulation.

                  sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                  sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                  sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #8

                  And then we make a silly but useful assumption. We are very honest about this, the section is titled "All models are wrong, some are useful"

                  We say that all satellites are spheres. Obviously, this is not true. But it provides a good comparison point. And without completely detailed, perfect info about the shape and materials of every satellite in orbit, we can't actually do a better job of this, and this actually does a good job of reproducing Starlink brightnesses. So, spherical cow it is.

                  sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                    A completely fucking ridiculous drawing in an FCC filing from Cowboy space (I did a thread about that last week, https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/117009754043091268) indicates they might have a reflecting area of 4800 m^2. WAY BIGGER than the ISS, the biggest thing ever placed in orbit, in pieces, not as one monolith. These companies are just making shit up. For comparison's sake, we just use 800m^2 for every simulation.

                    poslovitch@wikis.worldP This user is from outside of this forum
                    poslovitch@wikis.worldP This user is from outside of this forum
                    poslovitch@wikis.world
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #9

                    @sundogplanets and the ISS is already so bright! It's somewhat magical to watch it « swoosh » silently in the sky. Still have fond memories of it happening while I was on schoolbus back from high school

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                      And then we make a silly but useful assumption. We are very honest about this, the section is titled "All models are wrong, some are useful"

                      We say that all satellites are spheres. Obviously, this is not true. But it provides a good comparison point. And without completely detailed, perfect info about the shape and materials of every satellite in orbit, we can't actually do a better job of this, and this actually does a good job of reproducing Starlink brightnesses. So, spherical cow it is.

                      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                      sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                      sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #10

                      And then, we confirm something that Hugh Lewis posted previously (sorry for Linkedin, that's where it is https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sun-always-shines-tv-hugh-lewis-tlkbe)

                      These orbits don't actually stay sunlit all the time! Unless you're above something like 1400km altitude, these sun-synchronous terminator orbits will pass through Earth's shadow at some times of year. That means your data center will have to turn off every 90 min, or have huge batteries. You can't have 24hour sunlight AND low altitude, low-latency orbits.

                      jzb@hachyderm.ioJ sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 2 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                        A completely fucking ridiculous drawing in an FCC filing from Cowboy space (I did a thread about that last week, https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/117009754043091268) indicates they might have a reflecting area of 4800 m^2. WAY BIGGER than the ISS, the biggest thing ever placed in orbit, in pieces, not as one monolith. These companies are just making shit up. For comparison's sake, we just use 800m^2 for every simulation.

                        stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                        stevebellovin@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                        stevebellovin@infosec.exchange
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #11

                        @sundogplanets Seems to be three segments:

                        https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/117009754043091268
                        https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/117009949013506810
                        https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/117009959031935272

                        sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                          And then, we confirm something that Hugh Lewis posted previously (sorry for Linkedin, that's where it is https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sun-always-shines-tv-hugh-lewis-tlkbe)

                          These orbits don't actually stay sunlit all the time! Unless you're above something like 1400km altitude, these sun-synchronous terminator orbits will pass through Earth's shadow at some times of year. That means your data center will have to turn off every 90 min, or have huge batteries. You can't have 24hour sunlight AND low altitude, low-latency orbits.

                          jzb@hachyderm.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
                          jzb@hachyderm.ioJ This user is from outside of this forum
                          jzb@hachyderm.io
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #12

                          @sundogplanets I read that as Huey Lewis and was wondering when he'd drifted into this field...

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                            And then, we confirm something that Hugh Lewis posted previously (sorry for Linkedin, that's where it is https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/sun-always-shines-tv-hugh-lewis-tlkbe)

                            These orbits don't actually stay sunlit all the time! Unless you're above something like 1400km altitude, these sun-synchronous terminator orbits will pass through Earth's shadow at some times of year. That means your data center will have to turn off every 90 min, or have huge batteries. You can't have 24hour sunlight AND low altitude, low-latency orbits.

                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                            sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #13

                            Here's the future that the techbros want. Earth as a ringed planet.

                            What does that actually look like in the sky? Well, it depends on your latitude and the time of year. The worst time of year for sunlit Starlink satellites is summer, but due to these orbits, the worst time for sunlit sun-synchronous terminator orbits is actually the wintertime.

                            sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS lemgandi@mastodon.socialL raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR lauren@mastodon.laurenweinstein.orgL 4 Replies Last reply
                            0
                            • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                              Here's the future that the techbros want. Earth as a ringed planet.

                              What does that actually look like in the sky? Well, it depends on your latitude and the time of year. The worst time of year for sunlit Starlink satellites is summer, but due to these orbits, the worst time for sunlit sun-synchronous terminator orbits is actually the wintertime.

                              sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                              sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                              sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #14

                              And then there are a bunch of horrifying sky diagrams. Please take a look at the paper if you want to see those! I will share the extra movies here.

                              First, Cowboy "Stampede" (my goodness I hate these names), a single ring. This is the view from 30N on the winter solstice. You can even see in the movie how part of the ring is not sunlit. There is also a histogram showing the brightness of satellites and stars: for a lot of the time the ring is up, there are more bright sats than stars.

                              sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                And then there are a bunch of horrifying sky diagrams. Please take a look at the paper if you want to see those! I will share the extra movies here.

                                First, Cowboy "Stampede" (my goodness I hate these names), a single ring. This is the view from 30N on the winter solstice. You can even see in the movie how part of the ring is not sunlit. There is also a histogram showing the brightness of satellites and stars: for a lot of the time the ring is up, there are more bright sats than stars.

                                sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #15

                                Now Blue Origin's "Sunrise" which has the X-ring configurations. Here's from 30N on the winter solstice.

                                sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS rooster@beige.partyR 2 Replies Last reply
                                0
                                • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                  Now Blue Origin's "Sunrise" which has the X-ring configurations. Here's from 30N on the winter solstice.

                                  sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                  sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #16

                                  From the equator, you'd see the X directly overhead at 6pm. Lovely.

                                  archivist@social.linux.pizzaA sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS 2 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                    Here's the future that the techbros want. Earth as a ringed planet.

                                    What does that actually look like in the sky? Well, it depends on your latitude and the time of year. The worst time of year for sunlit Starlink satellites is summer, but due to these orbits, the worst time for sunlit sun-synchronous terminator orbits is actually the wintertime.

                                    lemgandi@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                                    lemgandi@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                                    lemgandi@mastodon.social
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #17

                                    @sundogplanets

                                    Kessler Syndrome Here We Come!

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                      From the equator, you'd see the X directly overhead at 6pm. Lovely.

                                      archivist@social.linux.pizzaA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      archivist@social.linux.pizzaA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      archivist@social.linux.pizza
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #18

                                      @sundogplanets and that is not even taking into consideration the damage such satellite constellations do to the atmosphere. Just the few tons of aluminum starlink is dumping into the atmosphere are already a big source of concern, 800m*m armatures raining from the sky sounds like what disaster movies are made of

                                      archivist@social.linux.pizzaA 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS sundogplanets@mastodon.social

                                        From the equator, you'd see the X directly overhead at 6pm. Lovely.

                                        sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                                        sundogplanets@mastodon.social
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #19

                                        From the far north (or far south), you'd see one of the rings continuously, all through the long winter night (which could be 24 hours of darkness and near-darkness). But the satellites will keep you company! Ugh. Gross. There would be more bright satellites than bright stars, all night long.

                                        sundogplanets@mastodon.socialS wikkit@mastodon.socialW 2 Replies Last reply
                                        0
                                        • archivist@social.linux.pizzaA archivist@social.linux.pizza

                                          @sundogplanets and that is not even taking into consideration the damage such satellite constellations do to the atmosphere. Just the few tons of aluminum starlink is dumping into the atmosphere are already a big source of concern, 800m*m armatures raining from the sky sounds like what disaster movies are made of

                                          archivist@social.linux.pizzaA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          archivist@social.linux.pizzaA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          archivist@social.linux.pizza
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #20

                                          @sundogplanets ah I see you mentioned it in the conclusion! Nice!

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper