Has any manufacturer designed a dashcam that will not affect UK DAB yet?

[Dashmellow]

Unfortunately the Starlink satellites are posing serious problems for astronomical observations and the more that are placed into low earth orbit the worse things will get. So far, SpaceX's efforts to ameliorate the problem have only been marginally successful. It is estimated that already with 653 satellites in place of 12,000 plus projected at least two thirds of typical clear sky optical telescopic observations maybe lost. Starlink is not the only corporate player in this game.

‘This Is Not Cool!’ - Astronomers Despair As SpaceX Starlink Train Ruins Observation Of Nearby Galaxies

Satellite mega-constellations risk ruining astronomy forever
There are some solutions that could soften the blow, but none will fix the problem outright.

"In the old days, maybe one of 100 images couldn’t be used because of an interfering satellite. Astronomers are now faced with the possibility that they might lose as much as two-thirds of their data to these satellite trails."

Starlink and the Astronomers: An Update

 

[Nigel]

Unfortunately the Starlink satellites are posing serious problems for astronomical observations and the more that are placed into low earth orbit the worse things will get.

So put the observatories in high earth orbit, above the starlink satellites, that will also remove all the atmospheric problems they have. If every launch of 60 starlink satellites had a free space reserved for an astronomy satellite then we could get some fantastic space telescopes up there! That would be 700 astronomical satellites by the time they reach their target of 42000 starlink satellites, and then they are going to be replacing the starlink satellites every 5 years, so it is 700 astronomical satellites, or segments of astronomical telescope every 5 years. Remembering that a space telescope does not need the huge structures of ground telescopes because they don't have to fight gravity to keep their segments in place.

 

[DT MI]

...a space telescope does not need the huge structures of ground telescopes because they don't have to fight gravity to keep their segments in place.

"Hubble is 43.5 feet long (13.2 m) and 14 feet wide (4.2 m) at the back, where the scientific instruments are housed. Weighing about 27,000 pounds (12,246 kg), the telescope is approximately the same size and weight as a school bus. "

From: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/spacecraft/index.html

 

[Nigel]

"Hubble is 43.5 feet long (13.2 m) and 14 feet wide (4.2 m) at the back, where the scientific instruments are housed. Weighing about 27,000 pounds (12,246 kg), the telescope is approximately the same size and weight as a school bus. "

From: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/spacecraft/index.html

They don't make them like that any more!

The James Webb Space Telescope mirror weighs 40 Kg x 18 segments = 720Kg,
The Hubble Space Telescope mirror weighs 818 Kg x 1 piece.
Much bigger, but lighter:

Multiple Starlink sized astronomical satellites could link themselves up to provide a huge mirror, don't even need to physically join together:

Square Kilometre Array - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There is plenty of space in space for such an array!

 

[Dashmellow]

So put the observatories in high earth orbit, above the starlink satellites, that will also remove all the atmospheric problems they have. If every launch of 60 starlink satellites had a free space reserved for an astronomy satellite then we could get some fantastic space telescopes up there! That would be 700 astronomical satellites by the time they reach their target of 42000 starlink satellites, and then they are going to be replacing the starlink satellites every 5 years, so it is 700 astronomical satellites, or segments of astronomical telescope every 5 years. Remembering that a space telescope does not need the huge structures of ground telescopes because they don't have to fight gravity to keep their segments in place.

Your self appointed punditry is always rather amusing but this time, Nigel you've gone totally off the rails. I've rarely seen anything more arrogant, condescending and at the same time downright uniformed and ignorant!

While we have the world's leading astronomers and scientific organizations up in arms with alarm over the deleterious effects on astronomical observation of these newly launched and upcoming swarms of commercial communications satellite constellations, you on the other hand are completely dismissive, as if you know better than the people who have dedicated their entire professional careers to these endeavors.

There are literally hundreds of major astronomical observatories around the world and many thousands of others of smaller scale, especially at academic institutions. The vast majority of these are earth based. Many of these are involved in vital, leading edge research that simply can not be conducted from earth orbit. - (list of largest optical reflecting telescopes)

Major new observatories designed to advance numerous fields of research into the cosmos are currently under construction and will be coming online over the next few years and indeed decades. These cutting edge observatories have capabilities that far exceed what even space based telescopes such as the Hubble can achieve.

For example, there is the ELT currently under construction in Northern Chile - The Extremely Large Telescope (part of the European Southern Observatory) began construction in 2017 at a cost of 1.54 billion dollars USD. It is the largest optical telescope ever built. It has a primary mirror of 130 feet in diameter with secondary mirror of 14 feet, supported by adaptive optics, eight laser guide star units and multiple large science instruments. "The observatory aims to gather 100 million times more light than the human eye, 13 times more light than the largest optical telescopes existing in 2014, and be able to correct for atmospheric distortion. It has around 256 times the light gathering area of the Hubble Space Telescope and, according to the ELT's specifications, will provide images 16 times sharper than those from Hubble".





Then there is the Vera C. Rubin Observatory, also known as the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST), also currently under construction in Chile. The Rubin Observatory has some rather remarkable capabilities that far exceed other wide field reflecting telescopes. Nothing else comes close. Again, no earth orbit telescopes can achieve what this one does! It is not yet fully operational but the first 3200 megapixel digital photos were released only two weeks ago!

• 27-ft (8.4-m) mirror, the width of a singles tennis court
• 3200 megapixel camera
• Each image the size of 40 full moons
• 37 billion stars and galaxies
• 10 year survey of the sky
• Up to 10 million alerts, 1000 pairs of exposures, 20 Terabytes of data .. every night!

Both earth based astronomical observatories and space based observatories each have their unique strengths and shortcomings. Space based telescopes, as amazing as they are are highly specialized, as are some earth based ones, especially as to the spectra they are sensitive too. For this reason, scientists have begun exploring the coordinated use of both space telescopes and ground based telescopes for specific types of scientific observations.

What’s Possible When Earth and Space-based Telescopes Work Together?



But then there is you, Nigel, who patronizingly and dismissively suggests that the entire world dispose of these remarkable, upcoming and previously existing outrageously expensive earth based observational devices, their enormous value to the scientific community and the scientists themselves who built their entire academic careers in designing and operating them.

According to you, who needs the Extremely Large Telescope? Let's chuck it!

According to you, who needs the Vera C. Rubin Observatory/Large Synoptic Survey Telescope? Let's ditch that one too!

Of course, while we're at it let's completely abandon the entire field of earth based optical astronomical observation as practiced by literally millions of professionals, scholars, educational institutions and amateur astronomers world wide. Hey, who needs people like Carolyn and Eugene M. Shoemaker and David Levy who in 1993 observed and documented comet Comet Shoemaker–Levy 9 before it crashed into Jupiter taken with the Schmidt telescope at Palomar Observatory? Or Comet Hale-Bopp discovered by Alan Hale ( a professional) and Thomas Bopp (an amatuer) in 1995 before it became visible to the human eye? Or any of the numerous discoveries made by both professionals and amateurs peering through their telescopes, sometimes standing at night out in a farmer's field. Individual, real time phenomenon simply cannot be achieved without the sort of nimble, keenly observed observations from individuals using optical scopes compared with the sort of sky based surveys you are advocating as a total replacement for traditional astronomy.

And then there is the fact that even if it were practical to switch all astronomical observations to earth orbit arrays, the cost would be completely prohibitive.

Buy hey, Nigel, you know far better than the all scientists, solar and planetary astronomers, astrophysicists, cosmologists, academicians and scholars whose work regularly benefits from these earth based telescopic observations as does the entire rest of mankind, don't you?.

But what the hell, Nigel, let's ditch all this scientific observation so we can have convenient high speed, ubiquitous internet and cell phone service at a yet to be revealed price so as to benefit private industry and the individuals who can afford it.

Galileo would be rolling over in his grave.

 

[Nigel]

According to you, who needs the...

Well that is a good question, what good has it brought to our lives? What great inventions and discoveries have come from it, and all the other modern large telescopes?

While it is clear that large clusters of communications satellites have already brought great benefits with more on the way. If you need to communicate from ship or plane then you use a current Starlink like system such as the Iridium satellite constellation, satellite phones using Iridium and other constellations keep a lot of people in remote locations safely in contact with vital data and emergency services.

And since there are already a lot of these satellites up there, this is not a new problem, it is only an issue now because of the number of satellites planned, but the problem already existed and there are measures in place to solve the problems.

Of course the astronomers would like all the satellites taken down, except of course for the useful ones like the Hubble Space Telescope, which can also appear in astronomical photos, here it is spoiling a photo of the sun:

You can see the Hubble Space Telescope in the sky above

The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) has now been in orbit for 25 years and this achievement has been a wonderful excuse to pore over the telescope's beautiful imagery, to consider its valuable contribution to science, to remember its troubled beginnings and applaud its stellar success.

phys.org

 

[Dashmellow]

Well that is a good question, what good has it brought to our lives? What great inventions and discoveries have come from it, and all the other modern large telescopes?

While it is clear that large clusters of communications satellites have already brought great benefits with more on the way. If you need to communicate from ship or plane then you use a current Starlink like system such as the Iridium satellite constellation, satellite phones using Iridium and other constellations keep a lot of people in remote locations safely in contact with vital data and emergency services.

And since there are already a lot of these satellites up there, this is not a new problem, it is only an issue now because of the number of satellites planned, but the problem already existed and there are measures in place to solve the problems.

Of course the astronomers would like all the satellites taken down, except of course for the useful ones like the Hubble Space Telescope, which can also appear in astronomical photos, here it is spoiling a photo of the sun:

You can see the Hubble Space Telescope in the sky above

The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) has now been in orbit for 25 years and this achievement has been a wonderful excuse to pore over the telescope's beautiful imagery, to consider its valuable contribution to science, to remember its troubled beginnings and applaud its stellar success.

phys.org

You really believe astronomical and academic research is not worth persuing? And we should abandon all the earth based scientific and academic research being conducted all around the globe at enormous expense in favor of ubiquitous cell phone and internet service provided by private, for profit industry?! Like I've already said, Galileo would be rolling over in his grave; as would Kepler; as would Hubble.

What a joke of a reply!

And FYI, astronomers have been dealing with satellites interfering with observations for quite some time now but it has been a mere annoyance, an occasional streak through as image, whereas these constellations of thousands of Starlink satellites completely ruin astronomical observations. They are also going to create vast amount of space junk.

SpaceX’s Starlink Could Cause Cascades of Space Junk
Plans for thousands of new communications satellites would revolutionize global telecommunications but also raise risks of disaster in Earth orbit

For the guy who always wants everyone to believe he's the smartest guy in the room, you sure sound like a complete dolt over this one, Nigel. As is so often the case, the more you try to save face over inane punditry, the more you step in it.

A Starlink constellation completely ruined this recently captured image of Comet Neowise



image shows the passage of a Starlink satellite cluster (bright streaks) through a telescope’s field of view at the Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory in Chile in November 2019.

 

[Nigel]

You really believe astronomical and academic research is not worth persuing?

I didn't say that, I just asked the question, which is giving us the most advantage?

It is not true that all these ground based telescopes are necessary, in fact the space telescopes are more useful and are giving us more discoveries, and I fully support the James Webb Space Telescope. Cheap launches provided by piggybacking on Starlink launches could well bring us far more value than some of the ground based telescopes.

The European Extremely Large Telescope is costing around €2 billion, that is less than the James Webb, but not that much less, and the James Webb isn't going in Earth orbit, it's going in Sun orbit, a million miles away.

A Starlink constellation completely ruined this recently captured image of Comet Neowise

That is inaccurate, I guess it should say "A Starlink train", something that only exists for a short time after launch, the satellites then disperse into their constellation orbits at which point you would only ever get one or two passing through the image, quite likely with one or two non-Starlink satellites. Yes, that photo got "ruined", although it is a far more popular photo than if it hadn't had the satellites in it!

As for the Space Junk issue, they shouldn't be launching unless that issue has been resolved adequately.

Europe's flagship telescopes will be "moderately affected" by the new satellite mega-constellations now being launched, according to a new study. Having thousands more bright objects in the sky will create inconvenience and extra cost, but the idea that astronomy faces some kind of a "cliff edge" is not correct, says Olivier Hainaut.

He's calculated how observing time might be limited by having 26,000 additional spacecraft in orbit. And it's manageable, he believes.

Europe's major telescopes 'can meet satellite challenge'

Europe's flagship telescopes will cope with the effects of thousands of new satellites in the sky.

www.bbc.co.uk

Don't think the discovery of life on Venus counts, that did not use an optical telescope!

 

[Dashmellow]

Well that is a good question, what good has it brought to our lives? What great inventions and discoveries have come from it, and all the other modern large telescopes?

So apparently you just feel entitled..."What's in it for me"? If not, why bother with scientific research?

As for what great discoveries have come from astronomical observations? Your question sounds like a moronic joke! Unbelievable!

Let's see, discoveries? How about red shift or black holes, the discovery of exoplanets, answers to the many of the important questions about the origins and age of the universe and life on earth for that matter, or confirmation of many of Einstein's theories to name a few. That comet that crashed into Jupiter was observed with earth based telescopes all over the world. I've seen it myself, up on a dark mountain here in Vermont under a crystal clear sky using a 9 inch Celestron Cassegrain reflector, along with a group of friends and acquaintances and some very excited and inspired young students who would never have had the same experience looking at that on a computer screen.

Of course, when it comes to discoveries going back to the astonishing landmark historical feats of Galileo, Kepler, Hubble and others, I will simply leave it at that.

I assume for someone like you to pose such a stupid, gratuitous question, asking what great discoveries have been made from earth based astronomical observations is simply just another example of the sort of peculiar trolling behavior you so often like to engage in. It's kind of sad really that you indulge in such time wasting nonsense.

It is not true that all these ground based telescopes are necessary, in fact the space telescopes are more useful and are giving us more discoveries, and I fully support the James Webb Space Telescope. Cheap launches provided by piggybacking on Starlink launches could well bring us far more value than some of the ground based telescopes.

No, it is true. Again, you've ignored the fact that ground based telescopes offer many unique capabilities and options that are unattainable in space based telescopes, their very wide fields, real time observations, customization features and technical flexibility among them. Another fact you ignore is the issue of access. Many prominent astronomers wait years for access to the various space based observation systems such as Hubble which is booked for years into the future as well as many of the ground observatories. Abandoning earth based astronomy facilities would set the field back for generations and the loss of ground based observations would be a huge set-back and blow to scientific discovery. And finally, cheap piggy-back launches of smaller telescopes on SpaxeX flights would by comparison never be the equivalent to major earth based telescopes.

Earth based telescopes make remarkable new discoveries all the time, especially when scientists are able to spend time concentrating on specific observations using a variety of earth based resources in concert.

In fact, just hours ago it was announced that phosphine gas molecules have been discovered in the heavily acidic upper atmosphere of Venus where temperatures are much more moderate than on the planet's inhospitable surface and it is theorized that this "may" be an indication of microbial life. So far, despite much needed caution and unwillingness to make any sweeping claims, no other explanation than that this currently "appears" to be a sign of life has been found! This remarkable discovery was made using the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope in Hawaii and 45 radio telescope antennas in the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array in Chile.

So, once again, you move the goalposts to make your weak argument. Again, you present yourself as being more knowledgeable than all the actual experts in the field, when in fact you are merely just another highly opinionated, self righteous guy at a keyboard on the internet. Just classic internet silliness.

The European Extremely Large Telescope is costing around €2 billion, that is less than the James Webb, but not that much less, and the James Webb isn't going in Earth orbit, it's going in Sun orbit, a million miles away.

So?

The James Webb telescope is a terrific development and it will be a major platform. It simply isn't a replacement for all the ground based telescopes in use today including the new ones that are yet to see first light. Despite your petty internet punditry, the researchers behind these projects who are far more intelligent and knowledgeable than you and the scientific organizations they are affiliated with wouldn't be putting together funding and resources building these new ground based telescopes if they were not worthwhile endeavors that will operate along with all the other important observatories.

That is inaccurate, I guess it should say "A Starlink train", something that only exists for a short time after launch, the satellites then disperse into their constellation orbits at which point you would only ever get one or two passing through the image, quite likely with one or two non-Starlink satellites. Yes, that photo got "ruined", although it is a far more popular photo than if it hadn't had the satellites in it!

You are just playing semantics here. The fact is that when thousands of these satellites are passing all over the sky they will ruin astronomical observations. It doesn't matter what you call them, swarms, trains, constellations, clusters, sat mobs. And again, you are just spouting personal opinions without any clue of what you are talking about. Experts have shown that when fully depoyed, far more than only one or two will be passing through astronomical images at any given moment across vast stretches of sky.

And this isn't at all about how "popular" an image may be on the internet. That's irrelevant. They are just illustrations of the situation. It is all about permanently damaging ground based astronomical research world wide.

 

[Nigel]

Let's see, discoveries? How about red shift or black holes,

Redshift discovered in 1848, not using the latest super giant telescopes!
Black holes discovered by Einstein using his brain, since imaged and explored using space telescopes which are necessary because the IR light required is blocked by the Earths atmosphere.

This remarkable discovery was made using the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope in Hawaii

The James Clerk Maxwell telescope was last large telescope to be seized by pirates off the USA coast on it's voyage from the UK ... not exactly the latest generation 21st century telescope!
In any case these are radio telescopes and unaffected by sunlight reflecting off Starlink satellites.

I think you are blowing this issue completely out of proportion, but there is an issue, and astronomy could benefit greatly by Starlink compensating by providing some free launch slots.

That comet that crashed into Jupiter was observed with earth based telescopes all over the world. I've seen it myself, up on a dark mountain here in Vermont under a crystal clear sky using a 9 inch Celestron Cassegrain reflector

The best images of that comet came from the Hubble Space Telescope, and your 9 inch reflector is not going to be severely impacted by satellites passing by, it is very much not a wide field instrument.

Again, you've ignored the fact that ground based telescopes offer many unique capabilities and options that are unattainable in space based telescopes, their very wide fields,

The latest naked eye comet, comet Neowise, that we saw a few weeks ago was discovered using the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) space telescope, wide fields are not unique to ground telescopes, while Infrared is unique to space telescopes!

 

[Dashmellow]

Redshift discovered in 1848, not using the latest super giant telescopes!
Black holes discovered by Einstein using his brain, since imaged and explored using space telescopes which are necessary because the IR light required is blocked by the Earths atmosphere.

The James Clerk Maxwell telescope was last large telescope to be seized by pirates off the USA coast on it's voyage from the UK ... not exactly the latest generation 21st century telescope!
In any case these are radio telescopes and unaffected by sunlight reflecting off Starlink satellites.

I think you are blowing this issue completely out of proportion, but there is an issue, and astronomy could benefit greatly by Starlink compensating by providing some free launch slots.


The best images of that comet came from the Hubble Space Telescope, and your 9 inch reflector is not going to be severely impacted by satellites passing by, it is very much not a wide field instrument.


The latest naked eye comet, comet Neowise, that we saw a few weeks ago was discovered using the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) space telescope, wide fields are not unique to ground telescopes, while Infrared is unique to space telescopes!

None of these little factoids are particularly relevant to the absurd assertion you are promoting. The notion that mankind should summarily discard the entire field of earth based optical astronomy, along with many billions of dollars worth of existing and currently under construction infrastructure so that a single for-profit corporation can blanket the sky with thousands of small satellites (and massive, ever increasing quantities of destructive space junk that will need to keep being added to) thus abruptly destroying a vital field of scientific discovery is foolishness beyond belief!

Furthermore, the notion that SpaceX can piggyback suitable telescopic observatories into space using the Falcon 9 booster they use to launch payloads like Starlink is highly doubtful. Beyond that the sheer cost of building and launching a fleet of such observatories, building appropriate ground stations, and all the other infrastructure that would be necessary to replace literally all the current earth based optical observatories world wide would be mindbogglingly cost prohibitive and impractical. Finally, there is absolutely no evidence that the types of smaller space based, highly specialized observatories you postulate could ever match the unique capabilities or technical requirements of larger earth based stations, especially the new class of super-telescopes like the Extremely Large Telescope or the Vera C. Rubin Observatory / Large Synoptic Survey Telescope. The LSST alone needs to process 20 terabytes of data per night without the load of having to transmit it from space!

Once again, as is so often the case with your highly questionable pronouncements and declarations I will put my faith in the actual experts and accomplished professionals in their selected fields who know what they are doing and talking about rather than the rantings of some self-appointed pundit on the internet who tries to present himself as an authority on literally every subject.

Maybe you should contact the folks behind the design, construction and building of the Extremely Large Telescope and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory and perhaps some of the other major observatories and explain to them they've got it all entirely wrong and that their entire careers have been a waste of time now that Starlink has arrived?

 

[country_hick]

I wonder if the telescope with the 3200 digital camera can be upgraded as technology improves. Maybe in another 10 or 20 years that sensor could double or triple its capacity if the telescopes optics are fine enough to allow it.

 

[Dashmellow]

I would assume the telescope's imager could be upgraded, along with the processing power used to operate it. The optics would likely still be suitable. For now, I'd love to see first hand what a 3200 megapixel image looks like.

 

[Nigel]

Furthermore, the notion that SpaceX can piggyback suitable telescopic observatories into space using the Falcon 9 booster they use to launch payloads like Starlink is highly doubtful.

The ASTERIA telescope, measuring 10 × 20 × 30 cm, with a mass of 12 kg (26 lb) is the smallest satellite telescope to detect an exoplanet, you could fit several of those into the space of one Starlink Satellite!

JPL mission breaks record for smallest satellite to detect an exoplanet

Long before it was deployed into low-Earth orbit from the International Space Station in Nov. 2017, the tiny ASTERIA spacecraft had a big goal: to prove that a satellite roughly the size of a briefcase could perform some of the complex tasks much larger space observatories use to study...

phys.org

There are quite a number of small space telescopes already in operation, such as the Small Astronomy Satellite Series, some of them highly successful:

Small Astronomy Satellite 3 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Dashmellow]

The ASTERIA telescope, measuring 10 × 20 × 30 cm, with a mass of 12 kg (26 lb) is the smallest satellite telescope to detect an exoplanet, you could fit several of those into the space of one Starlink Satellite!

JPL mission breaks record for smallest satellite to detect an exoplanet

Long before it was deployed into low-Earth orbit from the International Space Station in Nov. 2017, the tiny ASTERIA spacecraft had a big goal: to prove that a satellite roughly the size of a briefcase could perform some of the complex tasks much larger space observatories use to study...

phys.org

There are quite a number of small space telescopes already in operation, such as the Small Astronomy Satellite Series, some of them highly successful:

Small Astronomy Satellite 3 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It's hard to believe you are still at this. Oh, WAIT, I almost forgot who I am dealing with!

Well, good for the little satellite!

Space based telescopes, even the little ones obviously have an important and growing place in the exploration of the cosmos. But let's not forget, you are advocating for the complete and immediate unilateral trashing at the hands of a for-profit private corporation, of a foundational, major and vital part of the world's technical astronomy infrastructure worth billions of dollars with vast and increasing capabilities not offered by micro satellites. Unlike you, the people who actually know what they are doing and talking about see space based telescopes and instruments and earth based optical and radio telescopes, especially the new advanced models as all working together in concert to enhance man's knowledge of the cosmos.

As is always the case when you initiate one of these lame self righteous, provocative pissing matches that you often carry on literally for days, you offer up these kind of tangential, distracting posts that sidestep your original sophism because you don't have a cogent argument to support your initial premise. All you ever seem to have for us is that you would have everyone believe that you know better than literally anyone on every subject, including the world's leading experts.