Astronomer watches Starlink satellites sinking to build a 'planetary barometer'

Commenters debated an astronomer’s use of Starlink satellites’ orbital decay as a “planetary barometer.” Some praised the idea as clever and useful, with BlackRabbit1 likening it to GPS-based ionosphere work and autoexec calling it a silver lining despite Starlink’s downsides. Others pushed back on alarmist language: pclowes demanded citations for the claim that Starlink has “pushed Low Earth Orbit to the brink of the Kessler Syndrome,” embedding-shape argued markets only price risks after they materialize, and smallerize cited ESA/Ars Technica reporting that suggests collision risk grows over decades rather than immediate collapse. Brandonagr2 questioned short-term Kessler framing versus long decay times.

A technical debate centered on whether satellite drag data can resolve real atmospheric structure. Sandworm101 and schiffern argued the atmosphere’s nonuniformity and the averaging of drag over orbits limit localization without targeted surveys; jjk166 and crtified countered that comparing satellites in different orbits or inclinations can reveal spatial patterns. Schiffern suggested using altitude-loss inference or onboard accelerometers and noted SpaceX has shared useful tracking data in the past. ck2 added a geopolitical risk view, predicting intentional anti-satellite action could trigger cascading collisions. Overall commenters split between enthusiasm for repurposing megaconstellations for science and skepticism about overstated conclusions and measurement limits.