No future for AP because of satellites?

Topic starter

Jun 30, 2021

We are all familiar with the lines when a satellite flies through the FOV during acquisition. Most of the time, they can be removed from the images by integrating multiple shots and using software.

It looks somewhat different when a whole group of satellites moves across the sky in a tight line. An example of how this looks on a sub is shown in this image: https://www.astrobin.com/0k3ex1/
The satellites do not draw a narrow path across the sky, it is a wide highway.

And that's just the beginning. According to Wikipedia as of 6/30/2021, Starlink alone operates 1663 satellites (as of the end of May 2021) and has launch permits for another 11,927 satellites through the end of 2027, with another 30,000 applications pending. So within this decade, the number of near-Earth satellites will increase almost tenfold.

What does this mean for astrophotography?

Will our hobby soon become impossible because every sub will be rendered useless by a thick, bright line?

Will satellite operators find a technical solution to make their satellites "invisible"?

Will the programs for image processing get an algorithm to remove the thick strokes?

I lack the technical knowledge to answer these questions. But I look into the future with some concern. What are your thoughts on this?

Well Written Insightful Respectful Engaging

Björn Arnold

Jun 30, 2021

Hi Olaf,

I know it's not exactly the same as the highways but I made a simple simulation on this in a recent post. Don't know if you saw it.

From a technical perspective, I would say that the clipping algorithms for integration will remove the satellite trails. The evolvements in imaging technology will probably lead to even further reduced exposure times and therefore, the statistics are likely to work in our favor.

The major problem is actually the visual astronomy and the APers that look up into the night sky with the naked eye. Our visual system will automatically start trying to follow the moving objects and there will be a lot. What will become extremely difficult will be finding the objects in the night sky if we need to use our eyes.

And my greatest concern is actually the so-called Kessler effect (Wikipedia) which is a hypothetical but in my opinion highly plausible scenario, where a few satellite collisions can lead to a chain reaction of satellite destructions, rendering low-earth orbit (LEO) practically inaccessible for rockets (unmanned and manned). And if the LEO is full of debris, I am wondering how this scatters light.

Nevertheless, I don't see the overall benefit of all these super-constellations. It seems to serve only very specific purposes for a few but not mankind as a whole.

CS!

Björn

Helpful Insightful Respectful Engaging

andrea tasselli

Frequent contributor

Jun 30, 2021

I have seen some of them, moving like a freight train in the night sky. I also imaged them and noticed that some were making loops around the main path, which is kinda cute of them. Obviously if those satellites were covering the whole sky all the time it would be a major nightmare and well nigh impossible to do AP (maybe High resolution small field would be still be possible. Somehow I doubt it will come to that.

Steven

Jun 30, 2021 · Edited: Jun 30, 2021

Hard to say. So far most software is able to deal with it quite well. Either already getting rid of it during stacking, or removing it in photoshop after. Obviously, when an entire train comes in with the crappy space X stuff, it might become a lot more difficult.

But, at this time, it's still ok to deal with.

Maybe in the future software would develop even further, as they're so easy to predict and schedule, it might become even easier for software to deal with it..

- Where astrophotography tools can automatically time the exposures around the predicted paths of satellites.
- Stacking software knowing the coordinates, paths and times of the satellites, easily able to recognise them and instantly take them out of frames (without throwing away the entire frame).

I'm no software engineer or anything. But software like that should be doable right?
- We can already calculate ISS (and satellite) transits down to the second for every given location on earth.
- We can already plate solve,
With the combination of that, It would then seem that it wouldn't be impossible for software to plate solve your image, look at the time, run through a database of all the transits that happened during that time, and take those parts out? And stack all the good frames/parts, filling in the "gaps" that satellites left in a mosaic type way, using other frames.

Obviously technology is developing that is causing more satellites up there (the usefulness of some can be debatable)
But, so is the technology and software here on earth. And those 2 will probably keep on fighting for a long time to keep this hobby doable. Also because this impacts professional and scientific observatories. And I'm pretty sure they won't just roll over and die just like that.

Carastro

Jun 30, 2021

I'd like to know who gives out these permits and what authority do they have to speak on behalf of the entire workd?

Yes I think AP is going to become very problematic.

Carole

Olaf Fritsche

Topic starter

Jul 1, 2021

Carastro:
I'd like to know who gives out these permits and what authority do they have to speak on behalf of the entire workd?

Yes I think AP is going to become very problematic.

Carole

Licenses for U.S. satellites are issued by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). There is probably no international body for this.

The main beneficiaries are residents of remote areas in rich industrialized nations. The costs are high: a one-time charge of around $500 for the receiving antenna and a monthly charge of around $100 for the connection. Residents in poor countries certainly can't afford it.

Well Written Concise

Björn Arnold

Jul 1, 2021

Olaf Fritsche:
The main beneficiaries are residents of remote areas in rich industrialized nations. The costs are high: a one-time charge of around $500 for the receiving antenna and a monthly charge of around $100 for the connection. Residents in poor countries certainly can't afford it.

I‘ve been in the middle of the jungle in the Caribbean and had full 4G coverage, much better than in many places here in Germany and the mobile plans are a portion of German prices.

The argument to bring cheap internet to people remotely doesn’t catch if looking into the details. And installing multi-billion $$$ projects in LEO is probably not cheaper than installing antennas for residents in remote areas or install them a plug in the house.

The marketing is very good: „We are the good ones and bring civilization (internet) to the poor!“ … try to argue against this argument.

In these respects, I find google‘s approach with relay balloons a more clever solution. as it can be used temporarily and selective, where antennas and cables are certainly no solution.

Cheers,
Björn

Tom Gray

Jul 1, 2021

One more thing to add to a catalogue of challenges - top of which is the weather, at least in Northern latitudes! I am sure software developments will be able to easily remove these trails, sigma-clipping does a reasonable job already, and hopefully they will find a way of making these less visible. I agree the biggest impact will be on visual astronomy, but it would be good if someone would do a proper risk benefit analysis before a few individual companies pollute space even more. All in all I think the overall impact will be fairly minor.

Georg N. Nyman

Jul 1, 2021

I see more and more the traces of those satellites on the subs, but with intelligent software routines, they all can be eliminated. Not only because they are thin traces, but also because they are rather weak in intensity compared to airplanes. I think, it will be a bit more cumbersome for us, but the AP programs are able to remove those traces.
Just a few days ago, I counted about 15 satellites crossing my imaging field during the night (besides one plane), but after processing, all traces were gone.

Helpful

Ruediger

Jul 1, 2021 · Edited: Jul 1, 2021

Hello friends,

I have to admit, I had serious problems to remove them.
Especially when they are faint and you have only few long exposed subs. I did many stacking tries with different parameters in APP and PI and none of them was able to remove them. Either stamping or ignoring was the solution.
I agree on bright trails and big stacks it works well. But please keep in mind there are also situations where you cannot stack e.g. asteroids, or other fast moving dim moments.
Any new satellite makes it not easier and I do share Björn‘s opinion. The need is questionable and we definitely do not need multiple competing mega installations.

Clier Skies
Rüdiger

Georg N. Nyman

Jul 1, 2021

Hello Rüdiger,

I do completely agree - the need is very questionable - who needs that vast amount (final amount over 5000 satellites) - local solutions are much more reasonable and also most likely even less expensive - but Mr. Satellite wants to plant a memorial of his technological performance level into the skies.

There is already that much debris above our heads and clouds, I wonder, what might happen one day of all of those do not fly around the earth anymore..e.g. in case of the long expected polar shift….

CS
Georg

Benny Colyn

Jul 1, 2021

It greatly depends on the type of AP.

The guys doing milky way photography are shafted.

For planetary it is a non-issue.

For deep sky:

New fast optical designs like RASA, faster APOs with new ED glass and fast hyperbolic newts + low read noise CMOS is making many short subs very viable. Especially for broadband. With lots of subs (60+) the trails are easy to remove, I've had no problem with them so far.

For those on longer focal lengths/smaller FoVs the problem is also far less than those shooting 1 deg or more.

It's not gonna be impossible but it may require a refresh of the gear we use.

Ever-expanding light pollution and rapidly growing commercial aviation are far bigger problems in my part of the world.

Helpful

Will the increasing number of satellites in low-Earth orbits affect astrophotography?