upvote
I may have blown the math, but the last time I calculated I figured there were about 35 Starlink satellites above the horizon at my latitude. Looking into the suburban early night sky I see zero, one, or two satellites with about equal probability.

I think the hypothesis this leads to is that the "don't shine" techniques Starlink is using are working. I'm guessing the ones I see are either not Starlink or are Starlinks transitioning to their working orbit (they don't do full "dark mode" until they are in place.) If in place units shown I'd see a lot more.

So at least, maybe it won't all be gloom and doom. But if it is all gloom, at least it will have little sparkles floating around it.

reply
30 yard wide solar array from 300 miles away. There's a brief period of the day where they're visible but hardly a risk of making a dent in your view of the sky especially compared to ordinary terrestrial light pollution.
reply
I'm in a heavily light polluted city (Phoenix) and even with all the air and light pollution, can still see satellites every moment past 2AM to the east. At least this time of year.
reply
That's simply impossible. You must be seeing something else. They aren't that bright.
reply
If you don't take long exposures, the satellites won't cause you much trouble seeing the stars. Regular light pollution is the problem.
reply
They don't stop you from seeing the stars, but I find them very distracting. Makes the experience of looking up at the stars on a quiet night less peaceful, I find.
reply
Sucks for regular astronomy then, where long exposures are the norm.

Equally sucks for radio astronomy where the bloody things leak into spectrums they (Starlink) pinky promised to keep clean. And successive generations have worsened the problem, again despite promises to improve.

reply
Sucks being out bush stargazing and then seeing a massive constellation to remind you of Musk's wealth and influence. It's no longer possible to totally escape visual reminders of civilisation
reply
Starlink actively works with radioastronomy sites to avoid causing interference. They've posted about this before.
reply
Yes, they do post about it.

Yes they do talk about working to avoid causing interference.

That's been ongoing since before the first Starlink went up and has been ongoing as later generations haven't improved.

Second-Generation Starlink Satellites Leak 30 Times More Radio Interference, Threatening Astronomical Observations https://www.astron.nl/starlink-satellites/

  Observations with the LOFAR (Low Frequency Array) radio telescope last year showed that first generation Starlink satellites emit unintended radio waves that can hinder astronomical observations. New observations with the LOFAR radio telescope, the biggest radio telescope on Earth observing at low frequencies, have shown that the second generation ’V2-mini’ Starlink satellites emit up to 32 times brighter unintended radio waves than satellites from the previous generation, potentially blinding radio telescopes and crippling vital research of the Universe.
Still, at least they are talking about maybe doing something. Eventually. Perhaps.
reply
If you have evidence of them causing interference on a spectrum they shouldn’t be on, report it to the FCC. They take that very seriously
reply
Scientists analyze 76 million radio telescope images, find Starlink satellite interference 'where no signals are supposed to be present' (2025)

~ https://www.space.com/astronomy/scientists-analyze-76-millio...

and several other papers over the past half decade.

It's old news that they leak, and old news that F-all gets done about it.

Back to you.

reply
"It is important to note that Starlink is not violating current regulations, so is doing nothing wrong. Discussions we have had with SpaceX on the topic have been constructive," said Tingay. "We hope this study adds support for international efforts to update policies that regulate the impact of this technology on radio astronomy research that are currently underway."

Sounds like not transmitting but just electronics existing in space.

This is directly the opposite of the implication of using Ku/Ka bands they shouldn’t have (which is what the agreements were with astronomy groups - aka “pinky promise”).

reply
Starlink is leaking into radio astronomy bands, they initially said there wouldn't be a problem, but there was. They've later stated it would addressed in Gen-2 - it got worse.

> Starlink is not violating current regulations, so is doing nothing wrong.

Might be time to make global regulations on spectrum usage in space? That could take a while.

There are many past examples of companies "not violating current regulations" despite leaking toxins and other now recognised violations of the commons.

reply
> Starlink is leaking into radio astronomy bands, they initially said there wouldn't be a problem, but there was.

Again, these are two different things and conflating them is not productive. The initial discussion with Starlink and the astronomy community that I followed closely was explicitly about conflicts on the service frequencies (i.e. the thing unique to Starlink). They were cooperative with that.

Now it turns out electronics in space emit EM noise and that is the thing showing up in astronomy and it has nothing to do with the RF internet side. Non-Starlink satellites emit it as well but the sheer volume of starlink sats makes it easier to detect theirs.

The distinction matters because the same thing will happen with any constellation regardless of its purpose if it has onboard computers, batteries, solar arrays, etc.

I’m for passing regulations on this emissivity, but the framing that this is some kind of rug pull by spacex is dumb. They could have participated in the community the legally required amount like the Chinese do and we’d be in a much worse position.

reply
I'm not confident after all government investigations and lawsuits against Elon and his companies were dropped when Elon illegally accessed government systems, illegally took government data, illegally terminated government employees, and illegally eliminated government departments and programs while creating billions in expenses while pretending his intention was to help anyone but himself.

But sure, the FCC might take it seriously.

reply
Then just wait until the next administration. If they are building with technology that relies on the FCC being gutted, they will be in for a world of hurt when that changes.
reply
Brendan Carr seems more interested in settling political scores
reply
Well, yeah, but my problem is with the long exposures that I'm trying to get.
reply
You should be using stacking software anyway. It's a complete non issue.
reply
It will be the first generation with widespread space travel. My children will have consumer access to a view that no one had seen until 1961 and only government employees had seen since.
reply
light pollution already means the night sky is largely invisible outside of remote areas
reply
“You can’t see it most places so who cares if it goes away” is my most charitable interpretation of this.
reply
my comment is pushback against claiming "this generation" as uniquely doomed, and doomerism in general
reply
The majority of people live in cities - and a growing majority.
reply
I've never seen a glacier before, have you?
reply
Glaciers have never been accessible to most people.

The night sky has, until recently.

reply
Are you sure? Most people live in urban centers the last few generations and see few if any stars in the night sky
reply
Yeah. Hiked on and around them in PNW mountains.

And?

reply
Good for you getting that in before they disappear, probably got to see the night sky also, you can tell your grandchildren about that.

* https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/...

reply
If you all are so sad about it do something about it.

Like travel less, spend less on technology

You're part of the problem. It's not just you but it is you too.

So what I will tell my grandchildren is "The old Geezer Americans are fucking losers who fucked you over before you were born. You don't owe them any respect."

reply
I have seen both stars and satellites from suburbs and some urban areas. They are not very remote. There is a lot to see if you look. I do not like the light pollution but as it stands it is not the end of star gazing.
reply
“Remote areas” make up most of the world.
reply
Weighting by population seems reasonable here!
reply
Also the last generation to not frequent space. See the night sky up close.
reply
At Farpoint Observatory, this is a major concern for those keeping an eye out for near Earth objects.
reply
You can only see satellites during twilight when they can reflect sunlight. Don't panic.
reply
Many people have never seen that properly due to light pollution.
reply
go outside right now and look up. it's still there.
reply
Satellites only reflect sunlight when in sunlight. This only happens near sunrise and sunset.

The night sky will be unaffected by satellites for the foreseeable future.

reply
I've been watching satellites at all hours of the night for decades. You might want to double check with reality on that sunrise/sunset claim.
reply
You forgot about the radio spectrum pollution which affects the night and day sky right now .. and for the foreseeable future given the lack of progress in addressing that leakage.
reply
The topic is seeing the night sky.
reply
Parent might be talking about amateur radio astronomy which I agree might be straying from the main argument
reply
Professional radio astronomy - SKA et al.

eg: Scientists analyze 76 million radio telescope images, find Starlink satellite interference 'where no signals are supposed to be present' (2025)

~ https://www.space.com/astronomy/scientists-analyze-76-millio...

and the topic is Starlink (and other sat constellations) and their impact on the sky (visible and non visible).

reply
The message I responded to was about visible light:

"Will this be the last generation to remember the night sky?"

reply