Observed magnitudes of Qianfan spacecraft range from 4 when they are near zenith to 8 when low in the sky.
Since this is the first run of the Qianfan satellite constellation, the most appropriate comparison would be to Starlink’s original satellites. As you can see below, the notion that China’s satellites are “significantly brighter than those of Western systems” is a inaccurate.
The Original spacecrafts have a relatively flat phase function, so they are comparatively bright over a wide range of phase angle. […] the characteristic magnitudes are: 4.7 (Original) […]
The mean apparent magnitude of Starlink Mini Direct-To-Cell (DTC) satellites is 4.62 while the mean of magnitudes adjusted to a uniform distance of 1000 km is 5.50.
Clearly, even the newest Starlink satellites are well above the magnitude 7 limit astronomers recommend for satellite brightness.
This is a pop-science problem and not a real science problem. Any astronomy imaging system worth its salt has image stacking algos that remove transients easily enough.
Hi, it’s me. An actual scientist. Did grad school in planetary science. The same techniques we use to spot asteroids are the techniques used to spot satellites. But removing them is even simpler. It’s not algorithmically hard at all.
In fact, it’s so simple that I’ll write it out: take several images (at least three) in quick succession and take the median value across those images.
Oh hey, that was easy. Makes a good despeckle filter too for cosmic ray strikes or whatever else.
COPUOS operates by consensus, requiring approval of all of its more than 100 member states to move forward on any issue, and thus allowing even a single nation to block action
That’s a shitty way to get anything done. Unanimous approval should only be for really big issues. Otherwise just let it be a majority vote.
spacenews.com
Gorące