> That may be true for NASA and maybe the wealthiest and most connected universities and research centers.
I work at a well funded university, and it's not true for us, either. In fact I haven't met a single astronomer who is optimistic that somehow we'll magically get enough money to replace even a small fraction of the great telescopes we currently have on the ground.
In this case, comments they DIDN’T make. The FCC had a public comment period before Starlink was approved for launch and no one pointed out the problem for ground optical astronomy.
They were too busy looking the basement for the permits that were "on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard'".
So that means they are disqualified from commenting on the problem now? It was not clear how bright these things were going to be on orbit with the publicly available information at the time, and SpaceX obviously did not consider the impact.
Also the number went way up, and the orbits changed.
And the FCC has no rules about light pollution. Which is the reason we should have a global debate about it.
Radio astronomers did complain right away and got a sensitive part of the Ka band left unused -- it wasn't included in the reserved bands but has become important since. Very nice of Starlink to grant that request.
I'm pretty sure I saw concerns from the astronomical community before launch. Maybe they just weren't aware of the process to complain, or didn't know about the threat until after the comment period had closed.
I work at a well funded university, and it's not true for us, either. In fact I haven't met a single astronomer who is optimistic that somehow we'll magically get enough money to replace even a small fraction of the great telescopes we currently have on the ground.