@Tony had additional slides at the unconference. Could these be posted? These satellite constellations are a significant concern, and one hopes both LSST and the astronomical community in general can effectively influence international policy. But I am mostly concerned at LSST’s internal response to this issue and to future external challenges.
The (negative) discussion at the plenary about the proposed Twilight Near-Sun Survey and later at the unconference was extremely premature. At the latter there was even confusion between the North Ecliptic Spur and the Twilight Survey White Papers. Indeed it sounded like absent NASA funding SSSC science (or perhaps just NEOs) is being seen by some faction only as a “public service” LSST might pursue, rather than one of the four scientific pillars of the Survey.
Simulations responsive to the ensemble of White Papers should be completed before making dramatic public statements, negative or positive for that matter. And what should be simulated should be the Twilight Near-Sun Survey as described in the White Paper, i.e., with the shorter exposures requested and implementing (in the twilight) a NEO-friendly, immediately actionable quad cadence. NEO surveys already encounter frequent streaking from satellites, some quite bright. Moving object pipelines do quite well detecting on three out of four exposures (or out of five), and this is already required to handle chip gaps.
The sheer numbers involved in the new constellations are a concern, as well as the frequent reprovisioning launches that will be necessary. If these will present a unique challenge to LSST, it will likely not be only the Twilight Near-Sun Survey that will be impacted. And this most certainly has nothing to do with decisions related to the North Ecliptic Spur!