Jump to content
Unexplained Mysteries uses cookies. By using the site you consent to our use of cookies as per our Cookie Policy.
Close X
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Fake star generates 'space graffiti' complaints

28 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Waspie_Dwarf

Rocket Lab's second silver ball will remain on Earth

Quote

Rocket Lab won't put a second "humanity star" into orbit, saying its hands will be full from now on launching commercial payloads into space.

Spokeswoman Morgan Bailey said Rocket Lab expected to set the date for its first fully-commercial launch in about a fortnight and hoped to be launching a rocket a month by the end of the year.

The United States company – founded by Peter Beck who grew up in Invercargill – delighted rocket fans in January when it conducted New Zealand's first successful space launch from the Māhia Peninsula, putting three shoe-boxed satellites into orbit for customers.

arrow3.gif  Read More: stuff.co.nz

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Waspie_Dwarf
On 2/5/2018 at 1:49 AM, ChrLzs said:

3. No space organisations or astronomers are seriously protesting about this.  (But I do agree that something significantly brighter could be an issue.)

To back up your claim, here is what the world renowned Sky and Telescope magazine had to say:

Quote

Yet based on information from the popular satellite site Heavens Above, we all might do well to step back and take a breath. The Humanity Star won't be visible from most Northern Hemisphere locations until early March. Even then, as I run the predictions, there won't a single pass brighter than magnitude 4.6. Most were in the mid-sixes and sevens. Despite the great expectations, the disco ball might only be seen by dedicated satellite watchers, not the average global citizen like my neighbor Frank. On the other hand . . . according to a recent posting on the SeeSat-L home page, the folks at Rocket Lab are estimating a magnitude of 0.7. That's bright but nowhere near the brilliance of a typical ISS pass.

And also:

Quote

It's still early, and Humanity Star's orbit or other circumstances could change, but the way things look for the moment, it will neither fulfill its intended purpose nor tick off satellite haters.

The full article can be found here: Sky and Telescope.

Here is what another top astronomy journal, Astronomy Magazine had to say:

Quote

And during those nine months, the Humanity Star’s wide-coverage orbit means it’s only visible from any one place on the planet a few times, so if you see that it’s visible from your location, get out and look skyward to take part in this unique, yet global, experience.

Full article here: Astronomy Magazine.

So, when we have articles written by astronomers that genuinely know what they are talking about there is none of the rage that we have seen in this topic.

 

On 2/5/2018 at 1:49 AM, ChrLzs said:

4. Despite this having been aloft for quite a while already, no significant video or even time lapse still images of the satellite have yet been posted anywhere that I can find, so clearly the claims of it being 'bright' are just exaggerated rubbish.  Nobody can find the dam thing...

I have seen images of it now. I suspect that it's initial orbital path did not take it over densely populated areas at dawn or dusk, meaning that few would have seen it. That is now beginning to change.

If anyone does want to see it (I am going to make an attempt to photograph it... if the English weather gives me a break) then you can track it's position on this site: The Humanity Star. Alternatively the excellent Heavens Above site will enable people to find it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BorizBadinov

While this is fairly innocuous apparently I am not a fan of putting items into orbit for esthetic reasons. What worries me is the precedent this potentially sets when someone decides to do a Hancock on the moon someday. I know that's kind of an extreme example compared to a temporary flashy in the sky, but we tend to protect a thing after most of it has been messed up. Lets just start early on this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.