9.55
...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
3.10
...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Ain't it great?! A quality of life enabler to be sure. Good thing they don't interfere with our Astrophotography or observations of the night sky. Cheers!
|
4.72
...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
The Heavens-Above website gives you the visibility for your location. If you want to see the satellite in Stellarium, you need to have the source www.celestrak.org/NORAD/elements/active.txt configured. At least that works for me. I have not yet seen it by myself due to cloudy conditions here in Germany for some time now, but I hear that it is bright. CS Gernot |
|
9.55
...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Gernot Schreider: Yikes! With all the hurdles astrophotographers have to go through, including long delivery delays on new gear, rain and cloudy weather, poor seeing, moonlight and light pollution, now we have to deal with 10s of thousands of satellites constantly crossing the skies. I wish we treated the night sky like we did national forests, state park reserves and other places that express a respect and reverence for nature. We need nature far more than nature needs us. I'm not saying that satellites are not useful, but where's the limit? When does "enough" become the limit? |
7.63
...
·
·
4
likes
|
|---|
Unfortunately, we seem to treat the sky pretty much exactly the same as we’ve treated the terrestrial space around us… Maybe the best that we can hope for are small patches of sky—astronomy reserves—that are left satellite free…. Ha! The real problem is that we already have so much ground based light pollution, most people lost their night sky long ago—like 80% have never seen the milky way—so fat chance anyone will give it a thought when they sign up for a cheaper more dependable twitter account…. Scott |
