RE: RE[2]: Link to on-topic story

Kevin Fetter (
Fri, 16 Jul 1999 08:24:13 -0400

Don't forget that other satellite's such as the uars satellite can flare.
The flare's from it are not predictable.
So that satellite, and other's can ruin your photo's. There is one
difference between iridium and other satellite's, the iridium have
antenna's in a fixed position. For uars and other satellite's say a flare
is caused by the solar panels, these panels are not fixed and move,
reducing the chance the angle is just right to cause a flare, compared to
what the iridium with there fixed antenna can do.


At 01:50 AM 7/16/99 -0400, you wrote:
>No I was quite serious. I realize this is a satellite observing group, and 
>maybe I'm asking for it, but can you imagine the effects on 
>astrophotography wihen a random -8 flare can occur in your visible sky at 
>any moment...since there is always at least one overhead somewhere...and 
>unless they are tightly controlled in position, the flares become 
>unpredictable since the angles won't be exact. These things will someday 
>soon (if not now, certainly in 10 or 20 tears when they run out of aiming 
>fuel) absolutely ruin astronomy. Not all bright objects we can track are 
>good just because we can track and see them. A lot of us still like to look 
>at what's on the other side of the stuff in orbit.
>My 2 cents.
>Now donning flame proof suit for remainder of SeeSat responses :-)
>Meteor Wayne