The aiming is still a problem. The Hubble is relatively small. Even then, it can’t track fast enough to image the moon, let alone the earth’s surface.
Any useful reflector would be measured in Km^2 . Aiming that, with the same precision as Hubble would be a tall order. Added to that, the mirror would have to be light enough to launch. You’re basically trying to aim a sheet of tinfoil, as large as a stadium (minimum), with active tracking.
dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 2 days ago
The Hubble is also in a rather low Earth orbit (340-ish miles), which enables it to use magnetic brakes which allow it to ditch the excess energy from its reaction wheels into the Earth’s magnetic field so it can stop pivoting when it aims. The further away you get from the planet the less effective that becomes. The bigger your object is, the bigger your reaction mass needs to be.
And the Hubble doesn’t inherently roast or blind innocent bystanders as it swings its point of aim across all of the intervening space between its targets. Maintaining a steady shine on one particular point on the surface is one thing, but these idiots seem to be implying that they will sell sunlight-as-a-service via some kind of subscription model to multiple customers, so they would presumably be changing targets all the time.
The amount of time it takes for it to get on a target is broadly irrelevant, only that it can keep itself there once it eventually achieves targeting. This would not be so with the hypothetical solar reflectors, regardless of what altitude they were flown at.